28
The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation of law and policy directed at halting global biodiversity decline, it is a common concern that decline continues. Using a case study of six New Zealand birds, this article demonstrates reasons for the reduced effect of the law in the context of three international agreements: the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance; the Convention on Biological Diversity; and the Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals. The article concludes that the agreements are deficient in terms of obligation and consistency, and that these deficiencies are compounded by insufficient implementation and siloed approaches at the national level. Success is also compromised by the ways in which the law privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficient environment standards, sectoral defences, and widespread externalities. Ironically for birds, mobility which in evolution- ary terms has been a survival strategy, may become a liability in the Anthropocene. KEYWORDS : Threatened species, wildlife protection, Ramsar, CBD, CMS 1. INTRODUCTION Reconciling short-term interests with the need to create long-term benefits is a challenge in the Anthropocene. Continuing global biodiversity loss suggests that inter- national laws are failing to produce the desired results. Reasons for this include: inef- fective implementation at the national scale, lack of political will, inertia, insufficient technical knowledge and capacity, limited stakeholder collaboration, legal and juridical impediments, natural phenomena including climate change, lack of integration across sectors, the primacy of economic development and a failure to mainstream. 1 * Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Waikato. ([email protected]) 1 Stuart Harrop, ‘Living In Harmony with Nature? Outcomes of the 2010 Nagoya Conference of the Convention on Biological Diversity’ (2011) 23 JEL 117; Stuart Harrop and Diana Pritchard, ‘A Hard Instrument Goes Soft: The Implications of the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Current Trajectory’ (2011) 21 Global Environ Change 474; Nicholas Robinson, ‘Reflecting on Rio: Environmental law in the Coming Decades’ in Jamie Benidickson and others (eds), Environmental Law and Sustainability after Rio (Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd 2011) 24–26; Michael Bowman, ‘International Treaties and the Global Protection of Birds Part II’ (1999) 11 JEL 281, 298; Peter Herkenrath, ‘Birds and the Convention on Biological Diversity: Can Ornithologists and Bird Conservationists Make a Difference?’ (2001) 12 Bird V C The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: [email protected] 489 Journal of Environmental Law, 2015, 27, 489–516 doi: 10.1093/jel/eqv022 Advance Access Publication Date: 11 August 2015 Original article at University of Waikato Library on December 3, 2015 http://jel.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    4

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

The Reduced Effect of InternationalConservation Agreements A New Zealand

Case StudyPip Wallace

A B S T R A C T

Despite proliferation of law and policy directed at halting global biodiversity decline itis a common concern that decline continues Using a case study of six New Zealandbirds this article demonstrates reasons for the reduced effect of the law in the contextof three international agreements the Convention on Wetlands of InternationalImportance the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention onMigratory Species of Wild Animals The article concludes that the agreements aredeficient in terms of obligation and consistency and that these deficiencies arecompounded by insufficient implementation and siloed approaches at the nationallevel Success is also compromised by the ways in which the law privileges resource useto the detriment of species due to insufficient environment standards sectoraldefences and widespread externalities Ironically for birds mobility which in evolution-ary terms has been a survival strategy may become a liability in the AnthropoceneK E Y W O R D S Threatened species wildlife protection Ramsar CBD CMS

1 I N T R O D U C T I O NReconciling short-term interests with the need to create long-term benefits is achallenge in the Anthropocene Continuing global biodiversity loss suggests that inter-national laws are failing to produce the desired results Reasons for this include inef-fective implementation at the national scale lack of political will inertia insufficienttechnical knowledge and capacity limited stakeholder collaboration legal and juridicalimpediments natural phenomena including climate change lack of integration acrosssectors the primacy of economic development and a failure to mainstream1

Senior Lecturer Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences University of Waikato (pwallacewaikatoacnz)1 Stuart Harrop lsquoLiving In Harmony with Nature Outcomes of the 2010 Nagoya Conference of the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquo (2011) 23 JEL 117 Stuart Harrop and Diana Pritchard lsquoA HardInstrument Goes Soft The Implications of the Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Current Trajectoryrsquo(2011) 21 Global Environ Change 474 Nicholas Robinson lsquoReflecting on Rio Environmental law in theComing Decadesrsquo in Jamie Benidickson and others (eds) Environmental Law and Sustainability after Rio(Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd 2011) 24ndash26 Michael Bowman lsquoInternational Treaties and the GlobalProtection of Birds Part IIrsquo (1999) 11 JEL 281 298 Peter Herkenrath lsquoBirds and the Convention onBiological Diversity Can Ornithologists and Bird Conservationists Make a Differencersquo (2001) 12 Bird

VC The Author 2015 Published by Oxford University PressAll rights reserved For Permissions please email journalspermissionsoupcom

489

Journal of Environmental Law 2015 27 489ndash516doi 101093jeleqv022Advance Access Publication Date 11 August 2015Original article

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

This article is designed to complement this literature by considering these factorsin the specific context of species which the international agreements strive to protectThe methods include literature and policy review case law analysis and case studiesSix New Zealand birds are used to discuss the influence of three international treatiesupon conservation Although this is a context specific enquiry the study resonatesmore widely due to the choice of three international migrant species the commonthreats they face and the broad applicability of the international agreements

This form of enquiry is influenced by a seminal article by Professor JonasEbbesson exploring conservation law and methodology by reference to the move-ments habits and habitats of the honey buzzard bird2 This article uses the methodto apply both internal and external approaches to the law critiquing the existinginternational agreements and examining what they require in order to protect thegiven species

The case study species were chosen for contrasting habitat and distribution asfollows kokako (forest species) dotterel (coastal species) black petrel (marine species)godwit (international migrant) and wrybill (riverinewetland environment internal mi-grant) The sooty shearwater was included to enable consideration of customary takeThe range of different habitats and distribution enables consideration of differentthreats and legal responses and a wider view of the implementation of the law

New Zealand as a party to a wide range of international agreements must complywith the agreements and where necessary give full effect to them in the domesticlaw3 There is no single agreement relating to the protection of animals rathernumerous instruments deal with their protection The Convention on Wetlands ofInternational Importance (the Ramsar Convention) the Convention on BiologicalDiversity (CBD) and the Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS)form the focus of this article as they are particularly relevant to the case studyspecies The effect of these three agreements is examined and the findings confirm aseries of matters affecting the success of the international instruments At the interna-tional level the effect of the agreements is reduced due to the level of obligationimposed and at times a lack of consistency in treatment of endangered species bothwithin and between the agreements These matters are compounded at the national

Conserv Int 99 Susan Shearing lsquoBiodiversityrsquo in David Leary and Balakrishna Pisupati (eds) The Future ofInternational Environmental Law (United Nations University Press 2010) 42 48 Reed Noss and otherslsquoBolder Thinking for Conservationrsquo (2011) 26 Conserv Biol 1 Peter Sand lsquoA Century of Green LessonsThe Contribution of Nature Conservation Regimes to Global Governancersquo (2001) 1 Int Environ AgreePolitics Law Economics 33 Robert Boardman The International Politics of Bird Conservation BiodiversityRegionalism and Global Governance (Edward Elgar 2006) Ch 8 Michael Rands and others lsquoBiodiversityConservation Challenges Beyond 2010rsquo (2010) 329 Science 1298 Anthony Waldron and otherslsquoTargeting Global Conservation Funding to Limit Immediate Biodiversity Declinesrsquo (2013) 110 Proc NatlAcad Sci 12144 Donal McCarthy and others lsquoFinancial Costs of Meeting Global BiodiversityConservation Targets Current Spending and Unmet Needsrsquo (2012) 338 Science 946 Alvin Chandra andAnastasiya Idrisova lsquoConvention on Biological Diversity A Review of National Challenges andOpportunities for Implementationrsquo (2011) 20 Biodiversity Conserv 3295

2 Jonas Ebbesson lsquoLex Pernis Apivorus An Experiment of Environmental Law Methodologyrsquo (2003) 15JEL 15

3 Ministry for the Environment lsquoMultilateral Environmental Agreementsrsquo lthttpwwwmfegovtnzlawsmeasgt accessed 20 June 2015 Law Commission A New Zealand Guide to International Law and itsSources (NZLC R34 1996) 2

490 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

level due to insufficient implementation siloed approaches lack of consistency theprivileging of resource use and a need for more nuanced and effective spatialplanning for protection of endangered species The focus of this article is upon theinternational agreements and their implementation as I have considered the moregeneral problems with protection of endangered species in New Zealand elsewhere4

2 T H E S T A T E O F B I R D S I N N E W Z E A L A N DAlthough species extinction is a natural process5 the global rate at which birds arebeing lost is higher than at any other time in their evolutionary history6 andanthropogenic change of the environment is the key driver for this7 A recent globalassessment emphasises that lsquothe overarching driver of species extinction is humanpopulation growth and increasing per capita consumptionrsquo8

Boardman catalogues anthropogenic effects into three categories direct (eghunting) indirect (eg habitat fragmentation or introduced predators) and adaptationeffects (eg adaptation to the human environment)9 Inhabiting an archipelago of morethan 330 oceanic islands in the south-western Pacific Ocean New Zealand birds facesimilar threats to birds on a global scale such as habitat loss and modification but dueto evolution in the absence of mammalian predators are particularly threatened byalien invasive species10 Species loss in New Zealand is accentuated by high levels ofspecies endemism11 and in contrast to global averages New Zealand levels of threat-ened species are elevated12 At the generic level compared with global statistics NewZealand has a higher percentage of lsquothreatenedrsquo or lsquoat riskrsquo bird species Of 417 NewZealand species 77 (185) are lsquothreatenedrsquo and 92 (221) are lsquoat riskrsquo13 In 2013 theglobal figures were 1313 (132) threatened and 880 (89) near threatened14

4 Pip Wallace lsquoBoundaries of Absolute Protection Distribution of Benefit and Harm to Birds through Lawand Planning in New Zealandrsquo (PhD thesis University of Waikato 2014)

5 Alison Stattersfield Leon Bennun and Martin Jenkins (eds) State of the Worldrsquos Birds Indicators for ourChanging World (BirdLife International 2008) 15

6 Kenneth Norris and Deborah Pain (eds) Conserving Bird Biodiversity General Principles and theirApplication (CUP 2002) at ix

7 Carsten Rahbek and Robert Colwell lsquoBiodiversity Species Loss Revisitedrsquo (2011) 473 Nature 288ndash89 KateGrarock and others lsquoAre Invasive Species Drivers of Native Species Decline or Passengers of HabitatModification A Case Study of the Impact of the Common Myna (Acridotheres Tristis) on Australian BirdSpeciesrsquo (2014) 39 Austral Ecol 106 Stacey Jupiter Sangeeta Mangubhai and Richard KingsfordlsquoConservation of Biodiversity in the Pacific Islands of Oceania Challenges and Opportunitiesrsquo (2014) 20Pacific Conserv Biol 206

8 SL Pimm and others lsquoThe Biodiversity of Species and their Rates of Extinction Distribution andProtectionrsquo (2014) 344 Science 1246752-1 1246752-4

9 Boardman (n 1) 1410 Kerry-Jane Wilson The State of New Zealandrsquos Birds 2008 Special Report Conservation of Birds on the

Mainland (OSNZ 2008)11 RN Holdaway lsquoNew Zealandrsquos Pre-Human Avifauna and its Vulnerabilityrsquo (1989) 12 New Zeal J Ecol 1812 IUCN Red List Table 1 Numbers of threatened species by major groups of organisms (1996ndash2013) (IUCN

2013) lthttpwwwiucnredlistorgdocumentssummarystatistics2013_1_RL_Stats_Table1pdfgt ac-cessed 20 June 2015 Rod Hitchmough Summary of Changes to the Conservation Status of Taxa in the2008ndash11 New Zealand Threat Classification System Listing Cycle (Department of Conservation 2013) 4

13 Hugh Robertson and others Conservation Status of New Zealand Birds 2012 (Department ofConservation 2013) 2

14 BirdLife International State of the Worldrsquos Birds 2013 Indicators for our Changing World (2013) 7

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 491

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Eradication of predators on off-shore islands and species management pro-grammes have produced some notable conservation gains However areas lackingeffective species management are less likely to produce such gains and the mostrecent NZ Department of Conservation report identifies greater numbers of birdspecies becoming more threatened rather than less15 Causes of deterioration instatus are thought to be changes in land-use particularly conversion of sheep farmingto dairy farming changes in oceanic productivity possibly linked with globalwarming fisheries bycatch and predation or a combination of those named16

Three of the study birds are considered lsquothreatenedrsquo under the New Zealandclassification system each with a listing of lsquovulnerablersquo (black petrel dotterel andwrybill) The remaining three fall within the lsquoat riskrsquo category although the qualifierof lsquoconservation dependentrsquo for the kokako indicates that where intensive conserva-tion management of this bird fails the bird is also likely to fail The godwit and thesooty shearwater are buffered by their significantly largely populations but are stillsuffering significant losses within their ranges17

The case study birds face a range of common threats as well as species-specificthreats Threats common to the case study species include predation by invasivealien mammals and habitat loss or change These common threats however havecharacteristics particular to the bird species or habitat For instance the compositionof the suite of predators limiting the New Zealand dotterel may be different to thatof the kokako Alternatively the threat may be differentiated both within andbetween species dependent upon place Additionally the case study species mayexperience unique threats For instance the pelagic species the sooty shearwater andblack petrel are each threatened by fisheries bycatch yet a particular fishery may bemore damaging to one species than another and different methods of mitigation mayneed to be tailored to each species As birds face species specific threats conservationresponses must be well tuned to the particular pressure18 In other work I have estab-lished that case study bird habitat is lost or compromised by a wide range of activitiesin the landscape such as vegetation removal wetland drainage reclamation pointsource and non-point source pollution water level change spatial occupationthrough development of structures and obstacles presence of machinery and humandisturbance The extensive and complex threats starkly demonstrate the complex na-ture of the problem to which the law must respond

The mobility of birds in the land and seascape deepens these challenges as staticprotective reserves may prove insufficient in terms of extent and representativenessIronically mobility which in evolutionary terms has been a survival strategy maybecome a liability in the Anthropocene Of the case study birds only the kokako (apoor flier) is largely confined to protective reserves within which its conservationstatus is generally improving due to habitat protection and conservation manage-ment The failure of the case study species to thrive in the working lands beyondprotective reserves and pest proof fences signifies a serious loss of balance in the

15 Robertson and others (n 13)16 Colin Miskelly and others lsquoConservation Status of New Zealand Birdsrsquo (2008) 55 Notornis 12317 Wallace (n 4) ch 418 ibid

492 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

New Zealand landscape Bycatch in the marine environment presents a similarissue for birds such the black petrel and sooty shearwater which may breed withinprotective reserves but forage and migrate in the coastal marine and oceanic areasMobility in the form of foraging and migration takes species such as the black petrelsooty shearwater and godwit beyond New Zealand lands and waters further accentu-ates complex threat profiles19

The example of the dotterel thinly and widely distributed in North Island coastalhabitat demonstrates the pressured state of coastal spaces and provides some explan-ation for why the greatest number of threatened species is found in the ranks ofcoastal birds20 Coastal species (including also the godwit and the wrybill on itssummer ground) are threatened by significant habitat loss and modification and theinflux of people to these areas intensifies habitat disturbance by human activity Thisproblem emphasises the need to better understand the limits of co-existence as wellas the benefits to both birds and humans The enquiry now turns to the protectionoffered through the agreements

3 T H E C O N V E N T I O N O N W E T L A N D S O F I N T E R N A T I O N A LI M P O R T A N C E E S P E C I A L L Y A S W A T E R F O W L H A B I T A T ( R A M S A R )

The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance has significant potentialfor protecting the wetland habitat of avian species in New Zealand but this articleargues that in New Zealand the full potential is not realised Directed towardswetlands at an ecosystem level Ramsar affords protection to a broad range ofwetland types21 Ramsar was initiated in 1971 and New Zealand became a Party in1976 Acceding Parties are obliged to designate at least one wetland that is ofinternational importance In addition to the conservation of listed sites pursuant toArticle 1 Ramsar creates additional obligations to promote wise use of all wetlands(Article 2) and to establish nature reserves in wetlands regardless of internationalimportance (Article 3)

Ramsar is premised upon the concept of lsquowise usersquo and the text recognises theinterdependence of humans and the environment and underscores the value ofwetlands to humans Although explicitly positioned within the context of sustainabledevelopment a 2005 redefinition of lsquowise usersquo engages more overtly with ecologicalapproaches22

As outlined in the Ramsar Convention Manual the concept of lsquowise usersquo has beenfurther explained and associated measures to achieve the standard are recommendedFundamental recommendations include the preparation of a national wetland policythe development of programmes for wetland inventory monitoring research andeducation and the development of integrated management plans for all aspects ofthe wetlands and their relationships to the catchment23 Additional Ramsar guidance

19 Wallace (n 4) ch 420 Miskelly and others (n 16) 12521 Ramsar Convention Secretariat The Ramsar Convention Manual A Guide to the Convention on Wetlands

(Ramsar 1971) (Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013) 722 Ramsar Resolution IX1 Annex D (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing the

Implementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo23 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 46

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 493

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

also suggests an extensive range of integrated catchment and coastal zone measuresand supports the development of regulatory measures which extend to wetlandthreats not routinely captured in contemporary systems24 Ramsar was initiatedbefore the principles of prevention and precaution were fully developed and sub-sequent resolutions seek to incorporate them25 Later guidance considers thatlsquoenshrining the principles of prevention precaution and ldquothe polluter paysrdquo intodecision-making on activities affecting wetlandsrsquo are key factors to enhance the effect-iveness of regulation26

31 Ramsar in the New Zealand contextPotential benefits for New Zealand wetland ecosystems arise as a result of theConvention Ramsar raises the profile of wetlands as ecosystems under pressure andprovides extensive guidance for wetland conservation and restoration27 Site designa-tion may also provide better protection through supporting inclusion in domesticprotection schemes and increase governmental and community support As at 2014New Zealand has designated six wetlands28 The progressive Arawai Kakarikiprogramme established by the administering agency the Department ofConservation (DOC) aims to enhance the ecological restoration of three of NewZealandrsquos foremost wetlands and two of the three chosen sites (Whangamarino andAwarua) are Ramsar sites In New Zealand the sites also gain protection fromimpacts from mining developments through specific inclusion within Schedule 4 ofthe Crown Minerals Act 1991 (as amended by section 61 of the Crown MineralsAmendment Act 2013)

Ramsar brings a focus on ecological character vital for protecting the integrityof a site By Article 32 of the Convention Parties commit themselves to informingthe Ramsar secretariat if there are changes or imminent threats to the ecologicalcharacter of a designated site29 This commitment has led to better definition andguidance30 and the development of a framework for responding to change in wetlandecological character31 Reporting requirements have also been instituted to ensure

24 Ramsar Convention Secretariat Laws and Institutions Reviewing Laws and Institutions to Promote theConservation and Wise use of Wetlands (4th edn Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010) 37

25 Ramsar (2002) lsquoNew Guidelines for Management Planning of Ramsar Sitesrsquo Resolution VIII14 ch VI(2002) Guidelines on the Management and Allocation of Waterrsquo Resolution VIII1

26 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010 (n 24) 3827 For a full list of resolutions and recommendations see Appendix 2 of The Ramsar Convention Manual

(n 21) Research suggests that waterbird abundance increases at sites following Ramsar designationDavid Kleijn and others lsquoWaterbirds Increase more Rapidly in Ramsar-Designated Wetlands than inUnprotected Wetlandsrsquo (2014) 51 J Appl Ecol 289

28 Awarua Wetland with Waituna Lagoon Farewell Spit Whangamarino wetland Kopuatai Peat DomeFirth of Thames and Manawatu river mouth and estuary See Ramsar Wetlands International RamsarInformation Sheets lthttpramsarwetlandsorgDatabaseSearchforRamsarsitestabid765Defaultaspxgt accessed 20 June 2015

29 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 5230 (1996) lsquoWorking Definitions of Ecological Character Guidelines for Describing and Maintaining the

Ecological Character of Listed Sites and Guidelines for Operation of the Montreux Recordrsquo ResolutionVI1 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 25

31 Ramsar (2002) lsquoAssessing and Reporting the Status and Trends of Wetlands and the Implementation ofArticle 32 of the Conventionrsquo Resolution VIII8 Ramsar (2008) lsquoA Framework for processes of

494 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

that checks are routinely made on the threats to wetland sites and changes in theircondition However we will now see that in New Zealandrsquos case Ramsarrsquos reach islimited

32 The Reduced Effect of RamsarThough Ramsar creates a strong foundation upon which to build wetland protectionthis research establishes that protection is hindered in the New Zealand example bya lack of strong obligation at the international level and a corresponding lack ofrigour in implementation at the national level The limits of site-based protection arealso demonstrated as are difficulties in obtaining integrated and consistentprotection

The value of Ramsar to shift or lessen harmful influences is weakened by its fail-ure to adopt active precautionary and preventive language and by its employment ofthe term lsquowise usersquo Balancing development with protection and promoting wise uselsquoas far as possiblersquo is a potential contributing factor to the failure of New Zealand toeffectively limit wetland degradation and failure to achieve this balance is exacer-bated by the lack of clear guidance in the implementing legislation and associatedpolicy32

In addition a persuasive lsquoas far as possiblersquo approach driven by the notion of wiseuse dilutes potency and renders aspects of implementation more fluidComprehensive incorporation into domestic law is vital to implementation TheNew Zealand response although characterised by some genuine effort on behalf ofthe administering agencies is also marred by a range of failures including thosecanvassed in subsequent paragraphs

New Zealand has few Ramsar designated sites only six compared with 169 in theUK 64 in Australia and 45 in Ireland33 In consideration of area the six NewZealand sites encompassing approximately 54 400 ha are dwarfed in comparison toCanada with 13 066 675 ha Australia with 8 117 145 ha34 and the UK with 785361 ha35

Although not a matter to which the state of existing sites can be attributed limiteddesignation may suggest a limited enthusiasm for protection DOC as the respon-sible agency is currently in the process of establishing further criteria for prioritisingRamsar site nominations36

A 2013 amendment to the Conservation Act 1987 has changed the manner inwhich Ramsar wetlands will be classified Previously classified by the Minister of

detecting reporting and responding to change in wetland ecological characterrsquo Resolution X16 RamsarConvention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 31

32 Controller and Auditor-General Department of Conservation Prioritising and Partnering to ManageBiodiversity (Office of the Auditor-General 2012) 43

33 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 10134 ibid35 Joint Nature Conservation Committee lsquoUK Ramsar Sitesrsquo (2013) lthttpjnccdefragovukpage-

1388gt accessed 21 June 201536 Tracie Dean-Speirs and others Analysis of Decisions from the 10th Meeting of Contracting Parties (COP10)

to the Ramsar Convention Ramsar (2011) 8 see also Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe Ramsar Strategic Plan2009ndash2015rsquo Resolution X1 Strategy 21 Ramsar site designation Department of Conservation NationalReport on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands by New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2014) 41

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 495

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Conservation by notice section 18AB now provides that such decisions will be madeby the Executive Council which will engage all Cabinet members in the classificationDilution of the power of the Minister of Conservation in this manner could poten-tially have a chilling effect upon further Ramsar designations particularly where theareas are mineral rich or similarly suitable for exploitive purposes

Designation of the six current sites arose through ad hoc responses to localapplications and with no strategic prioritisation A series of important shorebirdsites37 currently lack Ramsar protection despite ranking highly in the recent ecosys-tem prioritisation exercise carried out by DOC with several outranking designatedsites38 Encouragement by DOC of new Ramsar site nominations that fulfil nationalobjectives is a medium priority implementation action arising from COP10 andwork is underway to achieve this39 Designation as a Ramsar site is a common factorwhich triggers protective provisions in resource management plans prepared underthe Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) the legislation responsible for environ-mental management in New Zealand

The effect of Ramsar is significantly reduced due to inability of site-based legalprotection to extend to limiting the impacts of activities beyond the site Using theFirth of Thames as an example but drawing heavily on parallels from KopuataiWhangamarino and Waituna Lagoon it is apparent that designated sites suffer aplight relatively similar to unprotected lands and water At the sites birds areexposed to a range of threats caused inter alia by development and activity in thecatchment from sectors such agriculture and forestry40 Many impacts stem from offsite and create adverse conditions at the site These include habitat loss and modifi-cation due to degradation of water quality sedimentation vegetative changedrainage flood protection works presence of mammalian predators and pollutionThe impacts threaten the wrybill dotterel and godwit inhabiting the Ramsar site41

The ecosystem and habitat values protected by site designation may extendbeyond the boundaries of the protected site and onto private land42 In the case ofWhangamarino parcels of private land sit at the heart of the wetland The bounda-ries of the site-based protection may fail to reflect the flow of ecological processesand the movement of species thus creating a further vulnerability in protective effectThe Firth of Thames site is situated largely below mean high water springs and thusfails to incorporate much of the landward margins which species such as the wrybillgodwit and dotterel make use of This problem is accentuated as is the case in NewZealand where protection is premised less upon species threat status than habitat

37 JE Dowding and SJ Moore Habitat Networks of Indigenous Shorebirds in New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2006) 10 Woodley personal communication (August 2013)

38 Department of Conservation Data Layer ManagementUnits_2013Rankings_PublicViewOnly 2013accessed October 2013

39 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 8040 SC Myers and others lsquoWetland Management in New Zealand Are Current Approaches and Policies

Sustaining Wetland Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapesrsquo (2013) 56 Ecol Eng 10741 For description at Firth of Thames site see B Brownell J Dahm and M Graeme Priorities and Related

Actions for the Sustainable Management of the Firth of Thames Ramsar site Muddy Feet Phase II Keep theBirds Coming (Environment Waikato Technical Report 200815 2008) 14

42 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson [2009] DCR 827 CRI-2007-039-927 27 May 2009(Kopuatai)

496 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 2: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

This article is designed to complement this literature by considering these factorsin the specific context of species which the international agreements strive to protectThe methods include literature and policy review case law analysis and case studiesSix New Zealand birds are used to discuss the influence of three international treatiesupon conservation Although this is a context specific enquiry the study resonatesmore widely due to the choice of three international migrant species the commonthreats they face and the broad applicability of the international agreements

This form of enquiry is influenced by a seminal article by Professor JonasEbbesson exploring conservation law and methodology by reference to the move-ments habits and habitats of the honey buzzard bird2 This article uses the methodto apply both internal and external approaches to the law critiquing the existinginternational agreements and examining what they require in order to protect thegiven species

The case study species were chosen for contrasting habitat and distribution asfollows kokako (forest species) dotterel (coastal species) black petrel (marine species)godwit (international migrant) and wrybill (riverinewetland environment internal mi-grant) The sooty shearwater was included to enable consideration of customary takeThe range of different habitats and distribution enables consideration of differentthreats and legal responses and a wider view of the implementation of the law

New Zealand as a party to a wide range of international agreements must complywith the agreements and where necessary give full effect to them in the domesticlaw3 There is no single agreement relating to the protection of animals rathernumerous instruments deal with their protection The Convention on Wetlands ofInternational Importance (the Ramsar Convention) the Convention on BiologicalDiversity (CBD) and the Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS)form the focus of this article as they are particularly relevant to the case studyspecies The effect of these three agreements is examined and the findings confirm aseries of matters affecting the success of the international instruments At the interna-tional level the effect of the agreements is reduced due to the level of obligationimposed and at times a lack of consistency in treatment of endangered species bothwithin and between the agreements These matters are compounded at the national

Conserv Int 99 Susan Shearing lsquoBiodiversityrsquo in David Leary and Balakrishna Pisupati (eds) The Future ofInternational Environmental Law (United Nations University Press 2010) 42 48 Reed Noss and otherslsquoBolder Thinking for Conservationrsquo (2011) 26 Conserv Biol 1 Peter Sand lsquoA Century of Green LessonsThe Contribution of Nature Conservation Regimes to Global Governancersquo (2001) 1 Int Environ AgreePolitics Law Economics 33 Robert Boardman The International Politics of Bird Conservation BiodiversityRegionalism and Global Governance (Edward Elgar 2006) Ch 8 Michael Rands and others lsquoBiodiversityConservation Challenges Beyond 2010rsquo (2010) 329 Science 1298 Anthony Waldron and otherslsquoTargeting Global Conservation Funding to Limit Immediate Biodiversity Declinesrsquo (2013) 110 Proc NatlAcad Sci 12144 Donal McCarthy and others lsquoFinancial Costs of Meeting Global BiodiversityConservation Targets Current Spending and Unmet Needsrsquo (2012) 338 Science 946 Alvin Chandra andAnastasiya Idrisova lsquoConvention on Biological Diversity A Review of National Challenges andOpportunities for Implementationrsquo (2011) 20 Biodiversity Conserv 3295

2 Jonas Ebbesson lsquoLex Pernis Apivorus An Experiment of Environmental Law Methodologyrsquo (2003) 15JEL 15

3 Ministry for the Environment lsquoMultilateral Environmental Agreementsrsquo lthttpwwwmfegovtnzlawsmeasgt accessed 20 June 2015 Law Commission A New Zealand Guide to International Law and itsSources (NZLC R34 1996) 2

490 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

level due to insufficient implementation siloed approaches lack of consistency theprivileging of resource use and a need for more nuanced and effective spatialplanning for protection of endangered species The focus of this article is upon theinternational agreements and their implementation as I have considered the moregeneral problems with protection of endangered species in New Zealand elsewhere4

2 T H E S T A T E O F B I R D S I N N E W Z E A L A N DAlthough species extinction is a natural process5 the global rate at which birds arebeing lost is higher than at any other time in their evolutionary history6 andanthropogenic change of the environment is the key driver for this7 A recent globalassessment emphasises that lsquothe overarching driver of species extinction is humanpopulation growth and increasing per capita consumptionrsquo8

Boardman catalogues anthropogenic effects into three categories direct (eghunting) indirect (eg habitat fragmentation or introduced predators) and adaptationeffects (eg adaptation to the human environment)9 Inhabiting an archipelago of morethan 330 oceanic islands in the south-western Pacific Ocean New Zealand birds facesimilar threats to birds on a global scale such as habitat loss and modification but dueto evolution in the absence of mammalian predators are particularly threatened byalien invasive species10 Species loss in New Zealand is accentuated by high levels ofspecies endemism11 and in contrast to global averages New Zealand levels of threat-ened species are elevated12 At the generic level compared with global statistics NewZealand has a higher percentage of lsquothreatenedrsquo or lsquoat riskrsquo bird species Of 417 NewZealand species 77 (185) are lsquothreatenedrsquo and 92 (221) are lsquoat riskrsquo13 In 2013 theglobal figures were 1313 (132) threatened and 880 (89) near threatened14

4 Pip Wallace lsquoBoundaries of Absolute Protection Distribution of Benefit and Harm to Birds through Lawand Planning in New Zealandrsquo (PhD thesis University of Waikato 2014)

5 Alison Stattersfield Leon Bennun and Martin Jenkins (eds) State of the Worldrsquos Birds Indicators for ourChanging World (BirdLife International 2008) 15

6 Kenneth Norris and Deborah Pain (eds) Conserving Bird Biodiversity General Principles and theirApplication (CUP 2002) at ix

7 Carsten Rahbek and Robert Colwell lsquoBiodiversity Species Loss Revisitedrsquo (2011) 473 Nature 288ndash89 KateGrarock and others lsquoAre Invasive Species Drivers of Native Species Decline or Passengers of HabitatModification A Case Study of the Impact of the Common Myna (Acridotheres Tristis) on Australian BirdSpeciesrsquo (2014) 39 Austral Ecol 106 Stacey Jupiter Sangeeta Mangubhai and Richard KingsfordlsquoConservation of Biodiversity in the Pacific Islands of Oceania Challenges and Opportunitiesrsquo (2014) 20Pacific Conserv Biol 206

8 SL Pimm and others lsquoThe Biodiversity of Species and their Rates of Extinction Distribution andProtectionrsquo (2014) 344 Science 1246752-1 1246752-4

9 Boardman (n 1) 1410 Kerry-Jane Wilson The State of New Zealandrsquos Birds 2008 Special Report Conservation of Birds on the

Mainland (OSNZ 2008)11 RN Holdaway lsquoNew Zealandrsquos Pre-Human Avifauna and its Vulnerabilityrsquo (1989) 12 New Zeal J Ecol 1812 IUCN Red List Table 1 Numbers of threatened species by major groups of organisms (1996ndash2013) (IUCN

2013) lthttpwwwiucnredlistorgdocumentssummarystatistics2013_1_RL_Stats_Table1pdfgt ac-cessed 20 June 2015 Rod Hitchmough Summary of Changes to the Conservation Status of Taxa in the2008ndash11 New Zealand Threat Classification System Listing Cycle (Department of Conservation 2013) 4

13 Hugh Robertson and others Conservation Status of New Zealand Birds 2012 (Department ofConservation 2013) 2

14 BirdLife International State of the Worldrsquos Birds 2013 Indicators for our Changing World (2013) 7

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 491

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Eradication of predators on off-shore islands and species management pro-grammes have produced some notable conservation gains However areas lackingeffective species management are less likely to produce such gains and the mostrecent NZ Department of Conservation report identifies greater numbers of birdspecies becoming more threatened rather than less15 Causes of deterioration instatus are thought to be changes in land-use particularly conversion of sheep farmingto dairy farming changes in oceanic productivity possibly linked with globalwarming fisheries bycatch and predation or a combination of those named16

Three of the study birds are considered lsquothreatenedrsquo under the New Zealandclassification system each with a listing of lsquovulnerablersquo (black petrel dotterel andwrybill) The remaining three fall within the lsquoat riskrsquo category although the qualifierof lsquoconservation dependentrsquo for the kokako indicates that where intensive conserva-tion management of this bird fails the bird is also likely to fail The godwit and thesooty shearwater are buffered by their significantly largely populations but are stillsuffering significant losses within their ranges17

The case study birds face a range of common threats as well as species-specificthreats Threats common to the case study species include predation by invasivealien mammals and habitat loss or change These common threats however havecharacteristics particular to the bird species or habitat For instance the compositionof the suite of predators limiting the New Zealand dotterel may be different to thatof the kokako Alternatively the threat may be differentiated both within andbetween species dependent upon place Additionally the case study species mayexperience unique threats For instance the pelagic species the sooty shearwater andblack petrel are each threatened by fisheries bycatch yet a particular fishery may bemore damaging to one species than another and different methods of mitigation mayneed to be tailored to each species As birds face species specific threats conservationresponses must be well tuned to the particular pressure18 In other work I have estab-lished that case study bird habitat is lost or compromised by a wide range of activitiesin the landscape such as vegetation removal wetland drainage reclamation pointsource and non-point source pollution water level change spatial occupationthrough development of structures and obstacles presence of machinery and humandisturbance The extensive and complex threats starkly demonstrate the complex na-ture of the problem to which the law must respond

The mobility of birds in the land and seascape deepens these challenges as staticprotective reserves may prove insufficient in terms of extent and representativenessIronically mobility which in evolutionary terms has been a survival strategy maybecome a liability in the Anthropocene Of the case study birds only the kokako (apoor flier) is largely confined to protective reserves within which its conservationstatus is generally improving due to habitat protection and conservation manage-ment The failure of the case study species to thrive in the working lands beyondprotective reserves and pest proof fences signifies a serious loss of balance in the

15 Robertson and others (n 13)16 Colin Miskelly and others lsquoConservation Status of New Zealand Birdsrsquo (2008) 55 Notornis 12317 Wallace (n 4) ch 418 ibid

492 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

New Zealand landscape Bycatch in the marine environment presents a similarissue for birds such the black petrel and sooty shearwater which may breed withinprotective reserves but forage and migrate in the coastal marine and oceanic areasMobility in the form of foraging and migration takes species such as the black petrelsooty shearwater and godwit beyond New Zealand lands and waters further accentu-ates complex threat profiles19

The example of the dotterel thinly and widely distributed in North Island coastalhabitat demonstrates the pressured state of coastal spaces and provides some explan-ation for why the greatest number of threatened species is found in the ranks ofcoastal birds20 Coastal species (including also the godwit and the wrybill on itssummer ground) are threatened by significant habitat loss and modification and theinflux of people to these areas intensifies habitat disturbance by human activity Thisproblem emphasises the need to better understand the limits of co-existence as wellas the benefits to both birds and humans The enquiry now turns to the protectionoffered through the agreements

3 T H E C O N V E N T I O N O N W E T L A N D S O F I N T E R N A T I O N A LI M P O R T A N C E E S P E C I A L L Y A S W A T E R F O W L H A B I T A T ( R A M S A R )

The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance has significant potentialfor protecting the wetland habitat of avian species in New Zealand but this articleargues that in New Zealand the full potential is not realised Directed towardswetlands at an ecosystem level Ramsar affords protection to a broad range ofwetland types21 Ramsar was initiated in 1971 and New Zealand became a Party in1976 Acceding Parties are obliged to designate at least one wetland that is ofinternational importance In addition to the conservation of listed sites pursuant toArticle 1 Ramsar creates additional obligations to promote wise use of all wetlands(Article 2) and to establish nature reserves in wetlands regardless of internationalimportance (Article 3)

Ramsar is premised upon the concept of lsquowise usersquo and the text recognises theinterdependence of humans and the environment and underscores the value ofwetlands to humans Although explicitly positioned within the context of sustainabledevelopment a 2005 redefinition of lsquowise usersquo engages more overtly with ecologicalapproaches22

As outlined in the Ramsar Convention Manual the concept of lsquowise usersquo has beenfurther explained and associated measures to achieve the standard are recommendedFundamental recommendations include the preparation of a national wetland policythe development of programmes for wetland inventory monitoring research andeducation and the development of integrated management plans for all aspects ofthe wetlands and their relationships to the catchment23 Additional Ramsar guidance

19 Wallace (n 4) ch 420 Miskelly and others (n 16) 12521 Ramsar Convention Secretariat The Ramsar Convention Manual A Guide to the Convention on Wetlands

(Ramsar 1971) (Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013) 722 Ramsar Resolution IX1 Annex D (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing the

Implementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo23 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 46

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 493

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

also suggests an extensive range of integrated catchment and coastal zone measuresand supports the development of regulatory measures which extend to wetlandthreats not routinely captured in contemporary systems24 Ramsar was initiatedbefore the principles of prevention and precaution were fully developed and sub-sequent resolutions seek to incorporate them25 Later guidance considers thatlsquoenshrining the principles of prevention precaution and ldquothe polluter paysrdquo intodecision-making on activities affecting wetlandsrsquo are key factors to enhance the effect-iveness of regulation26

31 Ramsar in the New Zealand contextPotential benefits for New Zealand wetland ecosystems arise as a result of theConvention Ramsar raises the profile of wetlands as ecosystems under pressure andprovides extensive guidance for wetland conservation and restoration27 Site designa-tion may also provide better protection through supporting inclusion in domesticprotection schemes and increase governmental and community support As at 2014New Zealand has designated six wetlands28 The progressive Arawai Kakarikiprogramme established by the administering agency the Department ofConservation (DOC) aims to enhance the ecological restoration of three of NewZealandrsquos foremost wetlands and two of the three chosen sites (Whangamarino andAwarua) are Ramsar sites In New Zealand the sites also gain protection fromimpacts from mining developments through specific inclusion within Schedule 4 ofthe Crown Minerals Act 1991 (as amended by section 61 of the Crown MineralsAmendment Act 2013)

Ramsar brings a focus on ecological character vital for protecting the integrityof a site By Article 32 of the Convention Parties commit themselves to informingthe Ramsar secretariat if there are changes or imminent threats to the ecologicalcharacter of a designated site29 This commitment has led to better definition andguidance30 and the development of a framework for responding to change in wetlandecological character31 Reporting requirements have also been instituted to ensure

24 Ramsar Convention Secretariat Laws and Institutions Reviewing Laws and Institutions to Promote theConservation and Wise use of Wetlands (4th edn Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010) 37

25 Ramsar (2002) lsquoNew Guidelines for Management Planning of Ramsar Sitesrsquo Resolution VIII14 ch VI(2002) Guidelines on the Management and Allocation of Waterrsquo Resolution VIII1

26 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010 (n 24) 3827 For a full list of resolutions and recommendations see Appendix 2 of The Ramsar Convention Manual

(n 21) Research suggests that waterbird abundance increases at sites following Ramsar designationDavid Kleijn and others lsquoWaterbirds Increase more Rapidly in Ramsar-Designated Wetlands than inUnprotected Wetlandsrsquo (2014) 51 J Appl Ecol 289

28 Awarua Wetland with Waituna Lagoon Farewell Spit Whangamarino wetland Kopuatai Peat DomeFirth of Thames and Manawatu river mouth and estuary See Ramsar Wetlands International RamsarInformation Sheets lthttpramsarwetlandsorgDatabaseSearchforRamsarsitestabid765Defaultaspxgt accessed 20 June 2015

29 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 5230 (1996) lsquoWorking Definitions of Ecological Character Guidelines for Describing and Maintaining the

Ecological Character of Listed Sites and Guidelines for Operation of the Montreux Recordrsquo ResolutionVI1 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 25

31 Ramsar (2002) lsquoAssessing and Reporting the Status and Trends of Wetlands and the Implementation ofArticle 32 of the Conventionrsquo Resolution VIII8 Ramsar (2008) lsquoA Framework for processes of

494 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

that checks are routinely made on the threats to wetland sites and changes in theircondition However we will now see that in New Zealandrsquos case Ramsarrsquos reach islimited

32 The Reduced Effect of RamsarThough Ramsar creates a strong foundation upon which to build wetland protectionthis research establishes that protection is hindered in the New Zealand example bya lack of strong obligation at the international level and a corresponding lack ofrigour in implementation at the national level The limits of site-based protection arealso demonstrated as are difficulties in obtaining integrated and consistentprotection

The value of Ramsar to shift or lessen harmful influences is weakened by its fail-ure to adopt active precautionary and preventive language and by its employment ofthe term lsquowise usersquo Balancing development with protection and promoting wise uselsquoas far as possiblersquo is a potential contributing factor to the failure of New Zealand toeffectively limit wetland degradation and failure to achieve this balance is exacer-bated by the lack of clear guidance in the implementing legislation and associatedpolicy32

In addition a persuasive lsquoas far as possiblersquo approach driven by the notion of wiseuse dilutes potency and renders aspects of implementation more fluidComprehensive incorporation into domestic law is vital to implementation TheNew Zealand response although characterised by some genuine effort on behalf ofthe administering agencies is also marred by a range of failures including thosecanvassed in subsequent paragraphs

New Zealand has few Ramsar designated sites only six compared with 169 in theUK 64 in Australia and 45 in Ireland33 In consideration of area the six NewZealand sites encompassing approximately 54 400 ha are dwarfed in comparison toCanada with 13 066 675 ha Australia with 8 117 145 ha34 and the UK with 785361 ha35

Although not a matter to which the state of existing sites can be attributed limiteddesignation may suggest a limited enthusiasm for protection DOC as the respon-sible agency is currently in the process of establishing further criteria for prioritisingRamsar site nominations36

A 2013 amendment to the Conservation Act 1987 has changed the manner inwhich Ramsar wetlands will be classified Previously classified by the Minister of

detecting reporting and responding to change in wetland ecological characterrsquo Resolution X16 RamsarConvention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 31

32 Controller and Auditor-General Department of Conservation Prioritising and Partnering to ManageBiodiversity (Office of the Auditor-General 2012) 43

33 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 10134 ibid35 Joint Nature Conservation Committee lsquoUK Ramsar Sitesrsquo (2013) lthttpjnccdefragovukpage-

1388gt accessed 21 June 201536 Tracie Dean-Speirs and others Analysis of Decisions from the 10th Meeting of Contracting Parties (COP10)

to the Ramsar Convention Ramsar (2011) 8 see also Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe Ramsar Strategic Plan2009ndash2015rsquo Resolution X1 Strategy 21 Ramsar site designation Department of Conservation NationalReport on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands by New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2014) 41

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 495

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Conservation by notice section 18AB now provides that such decisions will be madeby the Executive Council which will engage all Cabinet members in the classificationDilution of the power of the Minister of Conservation in this manner could poten-tially have a chilling effect upon further Ramsar designations particularly where theareas are mineral rich or similarly suitable for exploitive purposes

Designation of the six current sites arose through ad hoc responses to localapplications and with no strategic prioritisation A series of important shorebirdsites37 currently lack Ramsar protection despite ranking highly in the recent ecosys-tem prioritisation exercise carried out by DOC with several outranking designatedsites38 Encouragement by DOC of new Ramsar site nominations that fulfil nationalobjectives is a medium priority implementation action arising from COP10 andwork is underway to achieve this39 Designation as a Ramsar site is a common factorwhich triggers protective provisions in resource management plans prepared underthe Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) the legislation responsible for environ-mental management in New Zealand

The effect of Ramsar is significantly reduced due to inability of site-based legalprotection to extend to limiting the impacts of activities beyond the site Using theFirth of Thames as an example but drawing heavily on parallels from KopuataiWhangamarino and Waituna Lagoon it is apparent that designated sites suffer aplight relatively similar to unprotected lands and water At the sites birds areexposed to a range of threats caused inter alia by development and activity in thecatchment from sectors such agriculture and forestry40 Many impacts stem from offsite and create adverse conditions at the site These include habitat loss and modifi-cation due to degradation of water quality sedimentation vegetative changedrainage flood protection works presence of mammalian predators and pollutionThe impacts threaten the wrybill dotterel and godwit inhabiting the Ramsar site41

The ecosystem and habitat values protected by site designation may extendbeyond the boundaries of the protected site and onto private land42 In the case ofWhangamarino parcels of private land sit at the heart of the wetland The bounda-ries of the site-based protection may fail to reflect the flow of ecological processesand the movement of species thus creating a further vulnerability in protective effectThe Firth of Thames site is situated largely below mean high water springs and thusfails to incorporate much of the landward margins which species such as the wrybillgodwit and dotterel make use of This problem is accentuated as is the case in NewZealand where protection is premised less upon species threat status than habitat

37 JE Dowding and SJ Moore Habitat Networks of Indigenous Shorebirds in New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2006) 10 Woodley personal communication (August 2013)

38 Department of Conservation Data Layer ManagementUnits_2013Rankings_PublicViewOnly 2013accessed October 2013

39 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 8040 SC Myers and others lsquoWetland Management in New Zealand Are Current Approaches and Policies

Sustaining Wetland Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapesrsquo (2013) 56 Ecol Eng 10741 For description at Firth of Thames site see B Brownell J Dahm and M Graeme Priorities and Related

Actions for the Sustainable Management of the Firth of Thames Ramsar site Muddy Feet Phase II Keep theBirds Coming (Environment Waikato Technical Report 200815 2008) 14

42 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson [2009] DCR 827 CRI-2007-039-927 27 May 2009(Kopuatai)

496 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 3: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

level due to insufficient implementation siloed approaches lack of consistency theprivileging of resource use and a need for more nuanced and effective spatialplanning for protection of endangered species The focus of this article is upon theinternational agreements and their implementation as I have considered the moregeneral problems with protection of endangered species in New Zealand elsewhere4

2 T H E S T A T E O F B I R D S I N N E W Z E A L A N DAlthough species extinction is a natural process5 the global rate at which birds arebeing lost is higher than at any other time in their evolutionary history6 andanthropogenic change of the environment is the key driver for this7 A recent globalassessment emphasises that lsquothe overarching driver of species extinction is humanpopulation growth and increasing per capita consumptionrsquo8

Boardman catalogues anthropogenic effects into three categories direct (eghunting) indirect (eg habitat fragmentation or introduced predators) and adaptationeffects (eg adaptation to the human environment)9 Inhabiting an archipelago of morethan 330 oceanic islands in the south-western Pacific Ocean New Zealand birds facesimilar threats to birds on a global scale such as habitat loss and modification but dueto evolution in the absence of mammalian predators are particularly threatened byalien invasive species10 Species loss in New Zealand is accentuated by high levels ofspecies endemism11 and in contrast to global averages New Zealand levels of threat-ened species are elevated12 At the generic level compared with global statistics NewZealand has a higher percentage of lsquothreatenedrsquo or lsquoat riskrsquo bird species Of 417 NewZealand species 77 (185) are lsquothreatenedrsquo and 92 (221) are lsquoat riskrsquo13 In 2013 theglobal figures were 1313 (132) threatened and 880 (89) near threatened14

4 Pip Wallace lsquoBoundaries of Absolute Protection Distribution of Benefit and Harm to Birds through Lawand Planning in New Zealandrsquo (PhD thesis University of Waikato 2014)

5 Alison Stattersfield Leon Bennun and Martin Jenkins (eds) State of the Worldrsquos Birds Indicators for ourChanging World (BirdLife International 2008) 15

6 Kenneth Norris and Deborah Pain (eds) Conserving Bird Biodiversity General Principles and theirApplication (CUP 2002) at ix

7 Carsten Rahbek and Robert Colwell lsquoBiodiversity Species Loss Revisitedrsquo (2011) 473 Nature 288ndash89 KateGrarock and others lsquoAre Invasive Species Drivers of Native Species Decline or Passengers of HabitatModification A Case Study of the Impact of the Common Myna (Acridotheres Tristis) on Australian BirdSpeciesrsquo (2014) 39 Austral Ecol 106 Stacey Jupiter Sangeeta Mangubhai and Richard KingsfordlsquoConservation of Biodiversity in the Pacific Islands of Oceania Challenges and Opportunitiesrsquo (2014) 20Pacific Conserv Biol 206

8 SL Pimm and others lsquoThe Biodiversity of Species and their Rates of Extinction Distribution andProtectionrsquo (2014) 344 Science 1246752-1 1246752-4

9 Boardman (n 1) 1410 Kerry-Jane Wilson The State of New Zealandrsquos Birds 2008 Special Report Conservation of Birds on the

Mainland (OSNZ 2008)11 RN Holdaway lsquoNew Zealandrsquos Pre-Human Avifauna and its Vulnerabilityrsquo (1989) 12 New Zeal J Ecol 1812 IUCN Red List Table 1 Numbers of threatened species by major groups of organisms (1996ndash2013) (IUCN

2013) lthttpwwwiucnredlistorgdocumentssummarystatistics2013_1_RL_Stats_Table1pdfgt ac-cessed 20 June 2015 Rod Hitchmough Summary of Changes to the Conservation Status of Taxa in the2008ndash11 New Zealand Threat Classification System Listing Cycle (Department of Conservation 2013) 4

13 Hugh Robertson and others Conservation Status of New Zealand Birds 2012 (Department ofConservation 2013) 2

14 BirdLife International State of the Worldrsquos Birds 2013 Indicators for our Changing World (2013) 7

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 491

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Eradication of predators on off-shore islands and species management pro-grammes have produced some notable conservation gains However areas lackingeffective species management are less likely to produce such gains and the mostrecent NZ Department of Conservation report identifies greater numbers of birdspecies becoming more threatened rather than less15 Causes of deterioration instatus are thought to be changes in land-use particularly conversion of sheep farmingto dairy farming changes in oceanic productivity possibly linked with globalwarming fisheries bycatch and predation or a combination of those named16

Three of the study birds are considered lsquothreatenedrsquo under the New Zealandclassification system each with a listing of lsquovulnerablersquo (black petrel dotterel andwrybill) The remaining three fall within the lsquoat riskrsquo category although the qualifierof lsquoconservation dependentrsquo for the kokako indicates that where intensive conserva-tion management of this bird fails the bird is also likely to fail The godwit and thesooty shearwater are buffered by their significantly largely populations but are stillsuffering significant losses within their ranges17

The case study birds face a range of common threats as well as species-specificthreats Threats common to the case study species include predation by invasivealien mammals and habitat loss or change These common threats however havecharacteristics particular to the bird species or habitat For instance the compositionof the suite of predators limiting the New Zealand dotterel may be different to thatof the kokako Alternatively the threat may be differentiated both within andbetween species dependent upon place Additionally the case study species mayexperience unique threats For instance the pelagic species the sooty shearwater andblack petrel are each threatened by fisheries bycatch yet a particular fishery may bemore damaging to one species than another and different methods of mitigation mayneed to be tailored to each species As birds face species specific threats conservationresponses must be well tuned to the particular pressure18 In other work I have estab-lished that case study bird habitat is lost or compromised by a wide range of activitiesin the landscape such as vegetation removal wetland drainage reclamation pointsource and non-point source pollution water level change spatial occupationthrough development of structures and obstacles presence of machinery and humandisturbance The extensive and complex threats starkly demonstrate the complex na-ture of the problem to which the law must respond

The mobility of birds in the land and seascape deepens these challenges as staticprotective reserves may prove insufficient in terms of extent and representativenessIronically mobility which in evolutionary terms has been a survival strategy maybecome a liability in the Anthropocene Of the case study birds only the kokako (apoor flier) is largely confined to protective reserves within which its conservationstatus is generally improving due to habitat protection and conservation manage-ment The failure of the case study species to thrive in the working lands beyondprotective reserves and pest proof fences signifies a serious loss of balance in the

15 Robertson and others (n 13)16 Colin Miskelly and others lsquoConservation Status of New Zealand Birdsrsquo (2008) 55 Notornis 12317 Wallace (n 4) ch 418 ibid

492 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

New Zealand landscape Bycatch in the marine environment presents a similarissue for birds such the black petrel and sooty shearwater which may breed withinprotective reserves but forage and migrate in the coastal marine and oceanic areasMobility in the form of foraging and migration takes species such as the black petrelsooty shearwater and godwit beyond New Zealand lands and waters further accentu-ates complex threat profiles19

The example of the dotterel thinly and widely distributed in North Island coastalhabitat demonstrates the pressured state of coastal spaces and provides some explan-ation for why the greatest number of threatened species is found in the ranks ofcoastal birds20 Coastal species (including also the godwit and the wrybill on itssummer ground) are threatened by significant habitat loss and modification and theinflux of people to these areas intensifies habitat disturbance by human activity Thisproblem emphasises the need to better understand the limits of co-existence as wellas the benefits to both birds and humans The enquiry now turns to the protectionoffered through the agreements

3 T H E C O N V E N T I O N O N W E T L A N D S O F I N T E R N A T I O N A LI M P O R T A N C E E S P E C I A L L Y A S W A T E R F O W L H A B I T A T ( R A M S A R )

The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance has significant potentialfor protecting the wetland habitat of avian species in New Zealand but this articleargues that in New Zealand the full potential is not realised Directed towardswetlands at an ecosystem level Ramsar affords protection to a broad range ofwetland types21 Ramsar was initiated in 1971 and New Zealand became a Party in1976 Acceding Parties are obliged to designate at least one wetland that is ofinternational importance In addition to the conservation of listed sites pursuant toArticle 1 Ramsar creates additional obligations to promote wise use of all wetlands(Article 2) and to establish nature reserves in wetlands regardless of internationalimportance (Article 3)

Ramsar is premised upon the concept of lsquowise usersquo and the text recognises theinterdependence of humans and the environment and underscores the value ofwetlands to humans Although explicitly positioned within the context of sustainabledevelopment a 2005 redefinition of lsquowise usersquo engages more overtly with ecologicalapproaches22

As outlined in the Ramsar Convention Manual the concept of lsquowise usersquo has beenfurther explained and associated measures to achieve the standard are recommendedFundamental recommendations include the preparation of a national wetland policythe development of programmes for wetland inventory monitoring research andeducation and the development of integrated management plans for all aspects ofthe wetlands and their relationships to the catchment23 Additional Ramsar guidance

19 Wallace (n 4) ch 420 Miskelly and others (n 16) 12521 Ramsar Convention Secretariat The Ramsar Convention Manual A Guide to the Convention on Wetlands

(Ramsar 1971) (Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013) 722 Ramsar Resolution IX1 Annex D (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing the

Implementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo23 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 46

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 493

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

also suggests an extensive range of integrated catchment and coastal zone measuresand supports the development of regulatory measures which extend to wetlandthreats not routinely captured in contemporary systems24 Ramsar was initiatedbefore the principles of prevention and precaution were fully developed and sub-sequent resolutions seek to incorporate them25 Later guidance considers thatlsquoenshrining the principles of prevention precaution and ldquothe polluter paysrdquo intodecision-making on activities affecting wetlandsrsquo are key factors to enhance the effect-iveness of regulation26

31 Ramsar in the New Zealand contextPotential benefits for New Zealand wetland ecosystems arise as a result of theConvention Ramsar raises the profile of wetlands as ecosystems under pressure andprovides extensive guidance for wetland conservation and restoration27 Site designa-tion may also provide better protection through supporting inclusion in domesticprotection schemes and increase governmental and community support As at 2014New Zealand has designated six wetlands28 The progressive Arawai Kakarikiprogramme established by the administering agency the Department ofConservation (DOC) aims to enhance the ecological restoration of three of NewZealandrsquos foremost wetlands and two of the three chosen sites (Whangamarino andAwarua) are Ramsar sites In New Zealand the sites also gain protection fromimpacts from mining developments through specific inclusion within Schedule 4 ofthe Crown Minerals Act 1991 (as amended by section 61 of the Crown MineralsAmendment Act 2013)

Ramsar brings a focus on ecological character vital for protecting the integrityof a site By Article 32 of the Convention Parties commit themselves to informingthe Ramsar secretariat if there are changes or imminent threats to the ecologicalcharacter of a designated site29 This commitment has led to better definition andguidance30 and the development of a framework for responding to change in wetlandecological character31 Reporting requirements have also been instituted to ensure

24 Ramsar Convention Secretariat Laws and Institutions Reviewing Laws and Institutions to Promote theConservation and Wise use of Wetlands (4th edn Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010) 37

25 Ramsar (2002) lsquoNew Guidelines for Management Planning of Ramsar Sitesrsquo Resolution VIII14 ch VI(2002) Guidelines on the Management and Allocation of Waterrsquo Resolution VIII1

26 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010 (n 24) 3827 For a full list of resolutions and recommendations see Appendix 2 of The Ramsar Convention Manual

(n 21) Research suggests that waterbird abundance increases at sites following Ramsar designationDavid Kleijn and others lsquoWaterbirds Increase more Rapidly in Ramsar-Designated Wetlands than inUnprotected Wetlandsrsquo (2014) 51 J Appl Ecol 289

28 Awarua Wetland with Waituna Lagoon Farewell Spit Whangamarino wetland Kopuatai Peat DomeFirth of Thames and Manawatu river mouth and estuary See Ramsar Wetlands International RamsarInformation Sheets lthttpramsarwetlandsorgDatabaseSearchforRamsarsitestabid765Defaultaspxgt accessed 20 June 2015

29 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 5230 (1996) lsquoWorking Definitions of Ecological Character Guidelines for Describing and Maintaining the

Ecological Character of Listed Sites and Guidelines for Operation of the Montreux Recordrsquo ResolutionVI1 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 25

31 Ramsar (2002) lsquoAssessing and Reporting the Status and Trends of Wetlands and the Implementation ofArticle 32 of the Conventionrsquo Resolution VIII8 Ramsar (2008) lsquoA Framework for processes of

494 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

that checks are routinely made on the threats to wetland sites and changes in theircondition However we will now see that in New Zealandrsquos case Ramsarrsquos reach islimited

32 The Reduced Effect of RamsarThough Ramsar creates a strong foundation upon which to build wetland protectionthis research establishes that protection is hindered in the New Zealand example bya lack of strong obligation at the international level and a corresponding lack ofrigour in implementation at the national level The limits of site-based protection arealso demonstrated as are difficulties in obtaining integrated and consistentprotection

The value of Ramsar to shift or lessen harmful influences is weakened by its fail-ure to adopt active precautionary and preventive language and by its employment ofthe term lsquowise usersquo Balancing development with protection and promoting wise uselsquoas far as possiblersquo is a potential contributing factor to the failure of New Zealand toeffectively limit wetland degradation and failure to achieve this balance is exacer-bated by the lack of clear guidance in the implementing legislation and associatedpolicy32

In addition a persuasive lsquoas far as possiblersquo approach driven by the notion of wiseuse dilutes potency and renders aspects of implementation more fluidComprehensive incorporation into domestic law is vital to implementation TheNew Zealand response although characterised by some genuine effort on behalf ofthe administering agencies is also marred by a range of failures including thosecanvassed in subsequent paragraphs

New Zealand has few Ramsar designated sites only six compared with 169 in theUK 64 in Australia and 45 in Ireland33 In consideration of area the six NewZealand sites encompassing approximately 54 400 ha are dwarfed in comparison toCanada with 13 066 675 ha Australia with 8 117 145 ha34 and the UK with 785361 ha35

Although not a matter to which the state of existing sites can be attributed limiteddesignation may suggest a limited enthusiasm for protection DOC as the respon-sible agency is currently in the process of establishing further criteria for prioritisingRamsar site nominations36

A 2013 amendment to the Conservation Act 1987 has changed the manner inwhich Ramsar wetlands will be classified Previously classified by the Minister of

detecting reporting and responding to change in wetland ecological characterrsquo Resolution X16 RamsarConvention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 31

32 Controller and Auditor-General Department of Conservation Prioritising and Partnering to ManageBiodiversity (Office of the Auditor-General 2012) 43

33 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 10134 ibid35 Joint Nature Conservation Committee lsquoUK Ramsar Sitesrsquo (2013) lthttpjnccdefragovukpage-

1388gt accessed 21 June 201536 Tracie Dean-Speirs and others Analysis of Decisions from the 10th Meeting of Contracting Parties (COP10)

to the Ramsar Convention Ramsar (2011) 8 see also Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe Ramsar Strategic Plan2009ndash2015rsquo Resolution X1 Strategy 21 Ramsar site designation Department of Conservation NationalReport on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands by New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2014) 41

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 495

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Conservation by notice section 18AB now provides that such decisions will be madeby the Executive Council which will engage all Cabinet members in the classificationDilution of the power of the Minister of Conservation in this manner could poten-tially have a chilling effect upon further Ramsar designations particularly where theareas are mineral rich or similarly suitable for exploitive purposes

Designation of the six current sites arose through ad hoc responses to localapplications and with no strategic prioritisation A series of important shorebirdsites37 currently lack Ramsar protection despite ranking highly in the recent ecosys-tem prioritisation exercise carried out by DOC with several outranking designatedsites38 Encouragement by DOC of new Ramsar site nominations that fulfil nationalobjectives is a medium priority implementation action arising from COP10 andwork is underway to achieve this39 Designation as a Ramsar site is a common factorwhich triggers protective provisions in resource management plans prepared underthe Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) the legislation responsible for environ-mental management in New Zealand

The effect of Ramsar is significantly reduced due to inability of site-based legalprotection to extend to limiting the impacts of activities beyond the site Using theFirth of Thames as an example but drawing heavily on parallels from KopuataiWhangamarino and Waituna Lagoon it is apparent that designated sites suffer aplight relatively similar to unprotected lands and water At the sites birds areexposed to a range of threats caused inter alia by development and activity in thecatchment from sectors such agriculture and forestry40 Many impacts stem from offsite and create adverse conditions at the site These include habitat loss and modifi-cation due to degradation of water quality sedimentation vegetative changedrainage flood protection works presence of mammalian predators and pollutionThe impacts threaten the wrybill dotterel and godwit inhabiting the Ramsar site41

The ecosystem and habitat values protected by site designation may extendbeyond the boundaries of the protected site and onto private land42 In the case ofWhangamarino parcels of private land sit at the heart of the wetland The bounda-ries of the site-based protection may fail to reflect the flow of ecological processesand the movement of species thus creating a further vulnerability in protective effectThe Firth of Thames site is situated largely below mean high water springs and thusfails to incorporate much of the landward margins which species such as the wrybillgodwit and dotterel make use of This problem is accentuated as is the case in NewZealand where protection is premised less upon species threat status than habitat

37 JE Dowding and SJ Moore Habitat Networks of Indigenous Shorebirds in New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2006) 10 Woodley personal communication (August 2013)

38 Department of Conservation Data Layer ManagementUnits_2013Rankings_PublicViewOnly 2013accessed October 2013

39 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 8040 SC Myers and others lsquoWetland Management in New Zealand Are Current Approaches and Policies

Sustaining Wetland Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapesrsquo (2013) 56 Ecol Eng 10741 For description at Firth of Thames site see B Brownell J Dahm and M Graeme Priorities and Related

Actions for the Sustainable Management of the Firth of Thames Ramsar site Muddy Feet Phase II Keep theBirds Coming (Environment Waikato Technical Report 200815 2008) 14

42 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson [2009] DCR 827 CRI-2007-039-927 27 May 2009(Kopuatai)

496 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 4: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

Eradication of predators on off-shore islands and species management pro-grammes have produced some notable conservation gains However areas lackingeffective species management are less likely to produce such gains and the mostrecent NZ Department of Conservation report identifies greater numbers of birdspecies becoming more threatened rather than less15 Causes of deterioration instatus are thought to be changes in land-use particularly conversion of sheep farmingto dairy farming changes in oceanic productivity possibly linked with globalwarming fisheries bycatch and predation or a combination of those named16

Three of the study birds are considered lsquothreatenedrsquo under the New Zealandclassification system each with a listing of lsquovulnerablersquo (black petrel dotterel andwrybill) The remaining three fall within the lsquoat riskrsquo category although the qualifierof lsquoconservation dependentrsquo for the kokako indicates that where intensive conserva-tion management of this bird fails the bird is also likely to fail The godwit and thesooty shearwater are buffered by their significantly largely populations but are stillsuffering significant losses within their ranges17

The case study birds face a range of common threats as well as species-specificthreats Threats common to the case study species include predation by invasivealien mammals and habitat loss or change These common threats however havecharacteristics particular to the bird species or habitat For instance the compositionof the suite of predators limiting the New Zealand dotterel may be different to thatof the kokako Alternatively the threat may be differentiated both within andbetween species dependent upon place Additionally the case study species mayexperience unique threats For instance the pelagic species the sooty shearwater andblack petrel are each threatened by fisheries bycatch yet a particular fishery may bemore damaging to one species than another and different methods of mitigation mayneed to be tailored to each species As birds face species specific threats conservationresponses must be well tuned to the particular pressure18 In other work I have estab-lished that case study bird habitat is lost or compromised by a wide range of activitiesin the landscape such as vegetation removal wetland drainage reclamation pointsource and non-point source pollution water level change spatial occupationthrough development of structures and obstacles presence of machinery and humandisturbance The extensive and complex threats starkly demonstrate the complex na-ture of the problem to which the law must respond

The mobility of birds in the land and seascape deepens these challenges as staticprotective reserves may prove insufficient in terms of extent and representativenessIronically mobility which in evolutionary terms has been a survival strategy maybecome a liability in the Anthropocene Of the case study birds only the kokako (apoor flier) is largely confined to protective reserves within which its conservationstatus is generally improving due to habitat protection and conservation manage-ment The failure of the case study species to thrive in the working lands beyondprotective reserves and pest proof fences signifies a serious loss of balance in the

15 Robertson and others (n 13)16 Colin Miskelly and others lsquoConservation Status of New Zealand Birdsrsquo (2008) 55 Notornis 12317 Wallace (n 4) ch 418 ibid

492 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

New Zealand landscape Bycatch in the marine environment presents a similarissue for birds such the black petrel and sooty shearwater which may breed withinprotective reserves but forage and migrate in the coastal marine and oceanic areasMobility in the form of foraging and migration takes species such as the black petrelsooty shearwater and godwit beyond New Zealand lands and waters further accentu-ates complex threat profiles19

The example of the dotterel thinly and widely distributed in North Island coastalhabitat demonstrates the pressured state of coastal spaces and provides some explan-ation for why the greatest number of threatened species is found in the ranks ofcoastal birds20 Coastal species (including also the godwit and the wrybill on itssummer ground) are threatened by significant habitat loss and modification and theinflux of people to these areas intensifies habitat disturbance by human activity Thisproblem emphasises the need to better understand the limits of co-existence as wellas the benefits to both birds and humans The enquiry now turns to the protectionoffered through the agreements

3 T H E C O N V E N T I O N O N W E T L A N D S O F I N T E R N A T I O N A LI M P O R T A N C E E S P E C I A L L Y A S W A T E R F O W L H A B I T A T ( R A M S A R )

The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance has significant potentialfor protecting the wetland habitat of avian species in New Zealand but this articleargues that in New Zealand the full potential is not realised Directed towardswetlands at an ecosystem level Ramsar affords protection to a broad range ofwetland types21 Ramsar was initiated in 1971 and New Zealand became a Party in1976 Acceding Parties are obliged to designate at least one wetland that is ofinternational importance In addition to the conservation of listed sites pursuant toArticle 1 Ramsar creates additional obligations to promote wise use of all wetlands(Article 2) and to establish nature reserves in wetlands regardless of internationalimportance (Article 3)

Ramsar is premised upon the concept of lsquowise usersquo and the text recognises theinterdependence of humans and the environment and underscores the value ofwetlands to humans Although explicitly positioned within the context of sustainabledevelopment a 2005 redefinition of lsquowise usersquo engages more overtly with ecologicalapproaches22

As outlined in the Ramsar Convention Manual the concept of lsquowise usersquo has beenfurther explained and associated measures to achieve the standard are recommendedFundamental recommendations include the preparation of a national wetland policythe development of programmes for wetland inventory monitoring research andeducation and the development of integrated management plans for all aspects ofthe wetlands and their relationships to the catchment23 Additional Ramsar guidance

19 Wallace (n 4) ch 420 Miskelly and others (n 16) 12521 Ramsar Convention Secretariat The Ramsar Convention Manual A Guide to the Convention on Wetlands

(Ramsar 1971) (Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013) 722 Ramsar Resolution IX1 Annex D (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing the

Implementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo23 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 46

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 493

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

also suggests an extensive range of integrated catchment and coastal zone measuresand supports the development of regulatory measures which extend to wetlandthreats not routinely captured in contemporary systems24 Ramsar was initiatedbefore the principles of prevention and precaution were fully developed and sub-sequent resolutions seek to incorporate them25 Later guidance considers thatlsquoenshrining the principles of prevention precaution and ldquothe polluter paysrdquo intodecision-making on activities affecting wetlandsrsquo are key factors to enhance the effect-iveness of regulation26

31 Ramsar in the New Zealand contextPotential benefits for New Zealand wetland ecosystems arise as a result of theConvention Ramsar raises the profile of wetlands as ecosystems under pressure andprovides extensive guidance for wetland conservation and restoration27 Site designa-tion may also provide better protection through supporting inclusion in domesticprotection schemes and increase governmental and community support As at 2014New Zealand has designated six wetlands28 The progressive Arawai Kakarikiprogramme established by the administering agency the Department ofConservation (DOC) aims to enhance the ecological restoration of three of NewZealandrsquos foremost wetlands and two of the three chosen sites (Whangamarino andAwarua) are Ramsar sites In New Zealand the sites also gain protection fromimpacts from mining developments through specific inclusion within Schedule 4 ofthe Crown Minerals Act 1991 (as amended by section 61 of the Crown MineralsAmendment Act 2013)

Ramsar brings a focus on ecological character vital for protecting the integrityof a site By Article 32 of the Convention Parties commit themselves to informingthe Ramsar secretariat if there are changes or imminent threats to the ecologicalcharacter of a designated site29 This commitment has led to better definition andguidance30 and the development of a framework for responding to change in wetlandecological character31 Reporting requirements have also been instituted to ensure

24 Ramsar Convention Secretariat Laws and Institutions Reviewing Laws and Institutions to Promote theConservation and Wise use of Wetlands (4th edn Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010) 37

25 Ramsar (2002) lsquoNew Guidelines for Management Planning of Ramsar Sitesrsquo Resolution VIII14 ch VI(2002) Guidelines on the Management and Allocation of Waterrsquo Resolution VIII1

26 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010 (n 24) 3827 For a full list of resolutions and recommendations see Appendix 2 of The Ramsar Convention Manual

(n 21) Research suggests that waterbird abundance increases at sites following Ramsar designationDavid Kleijn and others lsquoWaterbirds Increase more Rapidly in Ramsar-Designated Wetlands than inUnprotected Wetlandsrsquo (2014) 51 J Appl Ecol 289

28 Awarua Wetland with Waituna Lagoon Farewell Spit Whangamarino wetland Kopuatai Peat DomeFirth of Thames and Manawatu river mouth and estuary See Ramsar Wetlands International RamsarInformation Sheets lthttpramsarwetlandsorgDatabaseSearchforRamsarsitestabid765Defaultaspxgt accessed 20 June 2015

29 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 5230 (1996) lsquoWorking Definitions of Ecological Character Guidelines for Describing and Maintaining the

Ecological Character of Listed Sites and Guidelines for Operation of the Montreux Recordrsquo ResolutionVI1 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 25

31 Ramsar (2002) lsquoAssessing and Reporting the Status and Trends of Wetlands and the Implementation ofArticle 32 of the Conventionrsquo Resolution VIII8 Ramsar (2008) lsquoA Framework for processes of

494 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

that checks are routinely made on the threats to wetland sites and changes in theircondition However we will now see that in New Zealandrsquos case Ramsarrsquos reach islimited

32 The Reduced Effect of RamsarThough Ramsar creates a strong foundation upon which to build wetland protectionthis research establishes that protection is hindered in the New Zealand example bya lack of strong obligation at the international level and a corresponding lack ofrigour in implementation at the national level The limits of site-based protection arealso demonstrated as are difficulties in obtaining integrated and consistentprotection

The value of Ramsar to shift or lessen harmful influences is weakened by its fail-ure to adopt active precautionary and preventive language and by its employment ofthe term lsquowise usersquo Balancing development with protection and promoting wise uselsquoas far as possiblersquo is a potential contributing factor to the failure of New Zealand toeffectively limit wetland degradation and failure to achieve this balance is exacer-bated by the lack of clear guidance in the implementing legislation and associatedpolicy32

In addition a persuasive lsquoas far as possiblersquo approach driven by the notion of wiseuse dilutes potency and renders aspects of implementation more fluidComprehensive incorporation into domestic law is vital to implementation TheNew Zealand response although characterised by some genuine effort on behalf ofthe administering agencies is also marred by a range of failures including thosecanvassed in subsequent paragraphs

New Zealand has few Ramsar designated sites only six compared with 169 in theUK 64 in Australia and 45 in Ireland33 In consideration of area the six NewZealand sites encompassing approximately 54 400 ha are dwarfed in comparison toCanada with 13 066 675 ha Australia with 8 117 145 ha34 and the UK with 785361 ha35

Although not a matter to which the state of existing sites can be attributed limiteddesignation may suggest a limited enthusiasm for protection DOC as the respon-sible agency is currently in the process of establishing further criteria for prioritisingRamsar site nominations36

A 2013 amendment to the Conservation Act 1987 has changed the manner inwhich Ramsar wetlands will be classified Previously classified by the Minister of

detecting reporting and responding to change in wetland ecological characterrsquo Resolution X16 RamsarConvention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 31

32 Controller and Auditor-General Department of Conservation Prioritising and Partnering to ManageBiodiversity (Office of the Auditor-General 2012) 43

33 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 10134 ibid35 Joint Nature Conservation Committee lsquoUK Ramsar Sitesrsquo (2013) lthttpjnccdefragovukpage-

1388gt accessed 21 June 201536 Tracie Dean-Speirs and others Analysis of Decisions from the 10th Meeting of Contracting Parties (COP10)

to the Ramsar Convention Ramsar (2011) 8 see also Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe Ramsar Strategic Plan2009ndash2015rsquo Resolution X1 Strategy 21 Ramsar site designation Department of Conservation NationalReport on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands by New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2014) 41

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 495

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Conservation by notice section 18AB now provides that such decisions will be madeby the Executive Council which will engage all Cabinet members in the classificationDilution of the power of the Minister of Conservation in this manner could poten-tially have a chilling effect upon further Ramsar designations particularly where theareas are mineral rich or similarly suitable for exploitive purposes

Designation of the six current sites arose through ad hoc responses to localapplications and with no strategic prioritisation A series of important shorebirdsites37 currently lack Ramsar protection despite ranking highly in the recent ecosys-tem prioritisation exercise carried out by DOC with several outranking designatedsites38 Encouragement by DOC of new Ramsar site nominations that fulfil nationalobjectives is a medium priority implementation action arising from COP10 andwork is underway to achieve this39 Designation as a Ramsar site is a common factorwhich triggers protective provisions in resource management plans prepared underthe Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) the legislation responsible for environ-mental management in New Zealand

The effect of Ramsar is significantly reduced due to inability of site-based legalprotection to extend to limiting the impacts of activities beyond the site Using theFirth of Thames as an example but drawing heavily on parallels from KopuataiWhangamarino and Waituna Lagoon it is apparent that designated sites suffer aplight relatively similar to unprotected lands and water At the sites birds areexposed to a range of threats caused inter alia by development and activity in thecatchment from sectors such agriculture and forestry40 Many impacts stem from offsite and create adverse conditions at the site These include habitat loss and modifi-cation due to degradation of water quality sedimentation vegetative changedrainage flood protection works presence of mammalian predators and pollutionThe impacts threaten the wrybill dotterel and godwit inhabiting the Ramsar site41

The ecosystem and habitat values protected by site designation may extendbeyond the boundaries of the protected site and onto private land42 In the case ofWhangamarino parcels of private land sit at the heart of the wetland The bounda-ries of the site-based protection may fail to reflect the flow of ecological processesand the movement of species thus creating a further vulnerability in protective effectThe Firth of Thames site is situated largely below mean high water springs and thusfails to incorporate much of the landward margins which species such as the wrybillgodwit and dotterel make use of This problem is accentuated as is the case in NewZealand where protection is premised less upon species threat status than habitat

37 JE Dowding and SJ Moore Habitat Networks of Indigenous Shorebirds in New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2006) 10 Woodley personal communication (August 2013)

38 Department of Conservation Data Layer ManagementUnits_2013Rankings_PublicViewOnly 2013accessed October 2013

39 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 8040 SC Myers and others lsquoWetland Management in New Zealand Are Current Approaches and Policies

Sustaining Wetland Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapesrsquo (2013) 56 Ecol Eng 10741 For description at Firth of Thames site see B Brownell J Dahm and M Graeme Priorities and Related

Actions for the Sustainable Management of the Firth of Thames Ramsar site Muddy Feet Phase II Keep theBirds Coming (Environment Waikato Technical Report 200815 2008) 14

42 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson [2009] DCR 827 CRI-2007-039-927 27 May 2009(Kopuatai)

496 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 5: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

New Zealand landscape Bycatch in the marine environment presents a similarissue for birds such the black petrel and sooty shearwater which may breed withinprotective reserves but forage and migrate in the coastal marine and oceanic areasMobility in the form of foraging and migration takes species such as the black petrelsooty shearwater and godwit beyond New Zealand lands and waters further accentu-ates complex threat profiles19

The example of the dotterel thinly and widely distributed in North Island coastalhabitat demonstrates the pressured state of coastal spaces and provides some explan-ation for why the greatest number of threatened species is found in the ranks ofcoastal birds20 Coastal species (including also the godwit and the wrybill on itssummer ground) are threatened by significant habitat loss and modification and theinflux of people to these areas intensifies habitat disturbance by human activity Thisproblem emphasises the need to better understand the limits of co-existence as wellas the benefits to both birds and humans The enquiry now turns to the protectionoffered through the agreements

3 T H E C O N V E N T I O N O N W E T L A N D S O F I N T E R N A T I O N A LI M P O R T A N C E E S P E C I A L L Y A S W A T E R F O W L H A B I T A T ( R A M S A R )

The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance has significant potentialfor protecting the wetland habitat of avian species in New Zealand but this articleargues that in New Zealand the full potential is not realised Directed towardswetlands at an ecosystem level Ramsar affords protection to a broad range ofwetland types21 Ramsar was initiated in 1971 and New Zealand became a Party in1976 Acceding Parties are obliged to designate at least one wetland that is ofinternational importance In addition to the conservation of listed sites pursuant toArticle 1 Ramsar creates additional obligations to promote wise use of all wetlands(Article 2) and to establish nature reserves in wetlands regardless of internationalimportance (Article 3)

Ramsar is premised upon the concept of lsquowise usersquo and the text recognises theinterdependence of humans and the environment and underscores the value ofwetlands to humans Although explicitly positioned within the context of sustainabledevelopment a 2005 redefinition of lsquowise usersquo engages more overtly with ecologicalapproaches22

As outlined in the Ramsar Convention Manual the concept of lsquowise usersquo has beenfurther explained and associated measures to achieve the standard are recommendedFundamental recommendations include the preparation of a national wetland policythe development of programmes for wetland inventory monitoring research andeducation and the development of integrated management plans for all aspects ofthe wetlands and their relationships to the catchment23 Additional Ramsar guidance

19 Wallace (n 4) ch 420 Miskelly and others (n 16) 12521 Ramsar Convention Secretariat The Ramsar Convention Manual A Guide to the Convention on Wetlands

(Ramsar 1971) (Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013) 722 Ramsar Resolution IX1 Annex D (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing the

Implementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo23 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 46

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 493

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

also suggests an extensive range of integrated catchment and coastal zone measuresand supports the development of regulatory measures which extend to wetlandthreats not routinely captured in contemporary systems24 Ramsar was initiatedbefore the principles of prevention and precaution were fully developed and sub-sequent resolutions seek to incorporate them25 Later guidance considers thatlsquoenshrining the principles of prevention precaution and ldquothe polluter paysrdquo intodecision-making on activities affecting wetlandsrsquo are key factors to enhance the effect-iveness of regulation26

31 Ramsar in the New Zealand contextPotential benefits for New Zealand wetland ecosystems arise as a result of theConvention Ramsar raises the profile of wetlands as ecosystems under pressure andprovides extensive guidance for wetland conservation and restoration27 Site designa-tion may also provide better protection through supporting inclusion in domesticprotection schemes and increase governmental and community support As at 2014New Zealand has designated six wetlands28 The progressive Arawai Kakarikiprogramme established by the administering agency the Department ofConservation (DOC) aims to enhance the ecological restoration of three of NewZealandrsquos foremost wetlands and two of the three chosen sites (Whangamarino andAwarua) are Ramsar sites In New Zealand the sites also gain protection fromimpacts from mining developments through specific inclusion within Schedule 4 ofthe Crown Minerals Act 1991 (as amended by section 61 of the Crown MineralsAmendment Act 2013)

Ramsar brings a focus on ecological character vital for protecting the integrityof a site By Article 32 of the Convention Parties commit themselves to informingthe Ramsar secretariat if there are changes or imminent threats to the ecologicalcharacter of a designated site29 This commitment has led to better definition andguidance30 and the development of a framework for responding to change in wetlandecological character31 Reporting requirements have also been instituted to ensure

24 Ramsar Convention Secretariat Laws and Institutions Reviewing Laws and Institutions to Promote theConservation and Wise use of Wetlands (4th edn Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010) 37

25 Ramsar (2002) lsquoNew Guidelines for Management Planning of Ramsar Sitesrsquo Resolution VIII14 ch VI(2002) Guidelines on the Management and Allocation of Waterrsquo Resolution VIII1

26 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010 (n 24) 3827 For a full list of resolutions and recommendations see Appendix 2 of The Ramsar Convention Manual

(n 21) Research suggests that waterbird abundance increases at sites following Ramsar designationDavid Kleijn and others lsquoWaterbirds Increase more Rapidly in Ramsar-Designated Wetlands than inUnprotected Wetlandsrsquo (2014) 51 J Appl Ecol 289

28 Awarua Wetland with Waituna Lagoon Farewell Spit Whangamarino wetland Kopuatai Peat DomeFirth of Thames and Manawatu river mouth and estuary See Ramsar Wetlands International RamsarInformation Sheets lthttpramsarwetlandsorgDatabaseSearchforRamsarsitestabid765Defaultaspxgt accessed 20 June 2015

29 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 5230 (1996) lsquoWorking Definitions of Ecological Character Guidelines for Describing and Maintaining the

Ecological Character of Listed Sites and Guidelines for Operation of the Montreux Recordrsquo ResolutionVI1 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 25

31 Ramsar (2002) lsquoAssessing and Reporting the Status and Trends of Wetlands and the Implementation ofArticle 32 of the Conventionrsquo Resolution VIII8 Ramsar (2008) lsquoA Framework for processes of

494 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

that checks are routinely made on the threats to wetland sites and changes in theircondition However we will now see that in New Zealandrsquos case Ramsarrsquos reach islimited

32 The Reduced Effect of RamsarThough Ramsar creates a strong foundation upon which to build wetland protectionthis research establishes that protection is hindered in the New Zealand example bya lack of strong obligation at the international level and a corresponding lack ofrigour in implementation at the national level The limits of site-based protection arealso demonstrated as are difficulties in obtaining integrated and consistentprotection

The value of Ramsar to shift or lessen harmful influences is weakened by its fail-ure to adopt active precautionary and preventive language and by its employment ofthe term lsquowise usersquo Balancing development with protection and promoting wise uselsquoas far as possiblersquo is a potential contributing factor to the failure of New Zealand toeffectively limit wetland degradation and failure to achieve this balance is exacer-bated by the lack of clear guidance in the implementing legislation and associatedpolicy32

In addition a persuasive lsquoas far as possiblersquo approach driven by the notion of wiseuse dilutes potency and renders aspects of implementation more fluidComprehensive incorporation into domestic law is vital to implementation TheNew Zealand response although characterised by some genuine effort on behalf ofthe administering agencies is also marred by a range of failures including thosecanvassed in subsequent paragraphs

New Zealand has few Ramsar designated sites only six compared with 169 in theUK 64 in Australia and 45 in Ireland33 In consideration of area the six NewZealand sites encompassing approximately 54 400 ha are dwarfed in comparison toCanada with 13 066 675 ha Australia with 8 117 145 ha34 and the UK with 785361 ha35

Although not a matter to which the state of existing sites can be attributed limiteddesignation may suggest a limited enthusiasm for protection DOC as the respon-sible agency is currently in the process of establishing further criteria for prioritisingRamsar site nominations36

A 2013 amendment to the Conservation Act 1987 has changed the manner inwhich Ramsar wetlands will be classified Previously classified by the Minister of

detecting reporting and responding to change in wetland ecological characterrsquo Resolution X16 RamsarConvention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 31

32 Controller and Auditor-General Department of Conservation Prioritising and Partnering to ManageBiodiversity (Office of the Auditor-General 2012) 43

33 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 10134 ibid35 Joint Nature Conservation Committee lsquoUK Ramsar Sitesrsquo (2013) lthttpjnccdefragovukpage-

1388gt accessed 21 June 201536 Tracie Dean-Speirs and others Analysis of Decisions from the 10th Meeting of Contracting Parties (COP10)

to the Ramsar Convention Ramsar (2011) 8 see also Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe Ramsar Strategic Plan2009ndash2015rsquo Resolution X1 Strategy 21 Ramsar site designation Department of Conservation NationalReport on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands by New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2014) 41

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 495

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Conservation by notice section 18AB now provides that such decisions will be madeby the Executive Council which will engage all Cabinet members in the classificationDilution of the power of the Minister of Conservation in this manner could poten-tially have a chilling effect upon further Ramsar designations particularly where theareas are mineral rich or similarly suitable for exploitive purposes

Designation of the six current sites arose through ad hoc responses to localapplications and with no strategic prioritisation A series of important shorebirdsites37 currently lack Ramsar protection despite ranking highly in the recent ecosys-tem prioritisation exercise carried out by DOC with several outranking designatedsites38 Encouragement by DOC of new Ramsar site nominations that fulfil nationalobjectives is a medium priority implementation action arising from COP10 andwork is underway to achieve this39 Designation as a Ramsar site is a common factorwhich triggers protective provisions in resource management plans prepared underthe Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) the legislation responsible for environ-mental management in New Zealand

The effect of Ramsar is significantly reduced due to inability of site-based legalprotection to extend to limiting the impacts of activities beyond the site Using theFirth of Thames as an example but drawing heavily on parallels from KopuataiWhangamarino and Waituna Lagoon it is apparent that designated sites suffer aplight relatively similar to unprotected lands and water At the sites birds areexposed to a range of threats caused inter alia by development and activity in thecatchment from sectors such agriculture and forestry40 Many impacts stem from offsite and create adverse conditions at the site These include habitat loss and modifi-cation due to degradation of water quality sedimentation vegetative changedrainage flood protection works presence of mammalian predators and pollutionThe impacts threaten the wrybill dotterel and godwit inhabiting the Ramsar site41

The ecosystem and habitat values protected by site designation may extendbeyond the boundaries of the protected site and onto private land42 In the case ofWhangamarino parcels of private land sit at the heart of the wetland The bounda-ries of the site-based protection may fail to reflect the flow of ecological processesand the movement of species thus creating a further vulnerability in protective effectThe Firth of Thames site is situated largely below mean high water springs and thusfails to incorporate much of the landward margins which species such as the wrybillgodwit and dotterel make use of This problem is accentuated as is the case in NewZealand where protection is premised less upon species threat status than habitat

37 JE Dowding and SJ Moore Habitat Networks of Indigenous Shorebirds in New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2006) 10 Woodley personal communication (August 2013)

38 Department of Conservation Data Layer ManagementUnits_2013Rankings_PublicViewOnly 2013accessed October 2013

39 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 8040 SC Myers and others lsquoWetland Management in New Zealand Are Current Approaches and Policies

Sustaining Wetland Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapesrsquo (2013) 56 Ecol Eng 10741 For description at Firth of Thames site see B Brownell J Dahm and M Graeme Priorities and Related

Actions for the Sustainable Management of the Firth of Thames Ramsar site Muddy Feet Phase II Keep theBirds Coming (Environment Waikato Technical Report 200815 2008) 14

42 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson [2009] DCR 827 CRI-2007-039-927 27 May 2009(Kopuatai)

496 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 6: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

also suggests an extensive range of integrated catchment and coastal zone measuresand supports the development of regulatory measures which extend to wetlandthreats not routinely captured in contemporary systems24 Ramsar was initiatedbefore the principles of prevention and precaution were fully developed and sub-sequent resolutions seek to incorporate them25 Later guidance considers thatlsquoenshrining the principles of prevention precaution and ldquothe polluter paysrdquo intodecision-making on activities affecting wetlandsrsquo are key factors to enhance the effect-iveness of regulation26

31 Ramsar in the New Zealand contextPotential benefits for New Zealand wetland ecosystems arise as a result of theConvention Ramsar raises the profile of wetlands as ecosystems under pressure andprovides extensive guidance for wetland conservation and restoration27 Site designa-tion may also provide better protection through supporting inclusion in domesticprotection schemes and increase governmental and community support As at 2014New Zealand has designated six wetlands28 The progressive Arawai Kakarikiprogramme established by the administering agency the Department ofConservation (DOC) aims to enhance the ecological restoration of three of NewZealandrsquos foremost wetlands and two of the three chosen sites (Whangamarino andAwarua) are Ramsar sites In New Zealand the sites also gain protection fromimpacts from mining developments through specific inclusion within Schedule 4 ofthe Crown Minerals Act 1991 (as amended by section 61 of the Crown MineralsAmendment Act 2013)

Ramsar brings a focus on ecological character vital for protecting the integrityof a site By Article 32 of the Convention Parties commit themselves to informingthe Ramsar secretariat if there are changes or imminent threats to the ecologicalcharacter of a designated site29 This commitment has led to better definition andguidance30 and the development of a framework for responding to change in wetlandecological character31 Reporting requirements have also been instituted to ensure

24 Ramsar Convention Secretariat Laws and Institutions Reviewing Laws and Institutions to Promote theConservation and Wise use of Wetlands (4th edn Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010) 37

25 Ramsar (2002) lsquoNew Guidelines for Management Planning of Ramsar Sitesrsquo Resolution VIII14 ch VI(2002) Guidelines on the Management and Allocation of Waterrsquo Resolution VIII1

26 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2010 (n 24) 3827 For a full list of resolutions and recommendations see Appendix 2 of The Ramsar Convention Manual

(n 21) Research suggests that waterbird abundance increases at sites following Ramsar designationDavid Kleijn and others lsquoWaterbirds Increase more Rapidly in Ramsar-Designated Wetlands than inUnprotected Wetlandsrsquo (2014) 51 J Appl Ecol 289

28 Awarua Wetland with Waituna Lagoon Farewell Spit Whangamarino wetland Kopuatai Peat DomeFirth of Thames and Manawatu river mouth and estuary See Ramsar Wetlands International RamsarInformation Sheets lthttpramsarwetlandsorgDatabaseSearchforRamsarsitestabid765Defaultaspxgt accessed 20 June 2015

29 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 5230 (1996) lsquoWorking Definitions of Ecological Character Guidelines for Describing and Maintaining the

Ecological Character of Listed Sites and Guidelines for Operation of the Montreux Recordrsquo ResolutionVI1 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 25

31 Ramsar (2002) lsquoAssessing and Reporting the Status and Trends of Wetlands and the Implementation ofArticle 32 of the Conventionrsquo Resolution VIII8 Ramsar (2008) lsquoA Framework for processes of

494 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

that checks are routinely made on the threats to wetland sites and changes in theircondition However we will now see that in New Zealandrsquos case Ramsarrsquos reach islimited

32 The Reduced Effect of RamsarThough Ramsar creates a strong foundation upon which to build wetland protectionthis research establishes that protection is hindered in the New Zealand example bya lack of strong obligation at the international level and a corresponding lack ofrigour in implementation at the national level The limits of site-based protection arealso demonstrated as are difficulties in obtaining integrated and consistentprotection

The value of Ramsar to shift or lessen harmful influences is weakened by its fail-ure to adopt active precautionary and preventive language and by its employment ofthe term lsquowise usersquo Balancing development with protection and promoting wise uselsquoas far as possiblersquo is a potential contributing factor to the failure of New Zealand toeffectively limit wetland degradation and failure to achieve this balance is exacer-bated by the lack of clear guidance in the implementing legislation and associatedpolicy32

In addition a persuasive lsquoas far as possiblersquo approach driven by the notion of wiseuse dilutes potency and renders aspects of implementation more fluidComprehensive incorporation into domestic law is vital to implementation TheNew Zealand response although characterised by some genuine effort on behalf ofthe administering agencies is also marred by a range of failures including thosecanvassed in subsequent paragraphs

New Zealand has few Ramsar designated sites only six compared with 169 in theUK 64 in Australia and 45 in Ireland33 In consideration of area the six NewZealand sites encompassing approximately 54 400 ha are dwarfed in comparison toCanada with 13 066 675 ha Australia with 8 117 145 ha34 and the UK with 785361 ha35

Although not a matter to which the state of existing sites can be attributed limiteddesignation may suggest a limited enthusiasm for protection DOC as the respon-sible agency is currently in the process of establishing further criteria for prioritisingRamsar site nominations36

A 2013 amendment to the Conservation Act 1987 has changed the manner inwhich Ramsar wetlands will be classified Previously classified by the Minister of

detecting reporting and responding to change in wetland ecological characterrsquo Resolution X16 RamsarConvention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 31

32 Controller and Auditor-General Department of Conservation Prioritising and Partnering to ManageBiodiversity (Office of the Auditor-General 2012) 43

33 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 10134 ibid35 Joint Nature Conservation Committee lsquoUK Ramsar Sitesrsquo (2013) lthttpjnccdefragovukpage-

1388gt accessed 21 June 201536 Tracie Dean-Speirs and others Analysis of Decisions from the 10th Meeting of Contracting Parties (COP10)

to the Ramsar Convention Ramsar (2011) 8 see also Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe Ramsar Strategic Plan2009ndash2015rsquo Resolution X1 Strategy 21 Ramsar site designation Department of Conservation NationalReport on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands by New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2014) 41

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 495

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Conservation by notice section 18AB now provides that such decisions will be madeby the Executive Council which will engage all Cabinet members in the classificationDilution of the power of the Minister of Conservation in this manner could poten-tially have a chilling effect upon further Ramsar designations particularly where theareas are mineral rich or similarly suitable for exploitive purposes

Designation of the six current sites arose through ad hoc responses to localapplications and with no strategic prioritisation A series of important shorebirdsites37 currently lack Ramsar protection despite ranking highly in the recent ecosys-tem prioritisation exercise carried out by DOC with several outranking designatedsites38 Encouragement by DOC of new Ramsar site nominations that fulfil nationalobjectives is a medium priority implementation action arising from COP10 andwork is underway to achieve this39 Designation as a Ramsar site is a common factorwhich triggers protective provisions in resource management plans prepared underthe Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) the legislation responsible for environ-mental management in New Zealand

The effect of Ramsar is significantly reduced due to inability of site-based legalprotection to extend to limiting the impacts of activities beyond the site Using theFirth of Thames as an example but drawing heavily on parallels from KopuataiWhangamarino and Waituna Lagoon it is apparent that designated sites suffer aplight relatively similar to unprotected lands and water At the sites birds areexposed to a range of threats caused inter alia by development and activity in thecatchment from sectors such agriculture and forestry40 Many impacts stem from offsite and create adverse conditions at the site These include habitat loss and modifi-cation due to degradation of water quality sedimentation vegetative changedrainage flood protection works presence of mammalian predators and pollutionThe impacts threaten the wrybill dotterel and godwit inhabiting the Ramsar site41

The ecosystem and habitat values protected by site designation may extendbeyond the boundaries of the protected site and onto private land42 In the case ofWhangamarino parcels of private land sit at the heart of the wetland The bounda-ries of the site-based protection may fail to reflect the flow of ecological processesand the movement of species thus creating a further vulnerability in protective effectThe Firth of Thames site is situated largely below mean high water springs and thusfails to incorporate much of the landward margins which species such as the wrybillgodwit and dotterel make use of This problem is accentuated as is the case in NewZealand where protection is premised less upon species threat status than habitat

37 JE Dowding and SJ Moore Habitat Networks of Indigenous Shorebirds in New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2006) 10 Woodley personal communication (August 2013)

38 Department of Conservation Data Layer ManagementUnits_2013Rankings_PublicViewOnly 2013accessed October 2013

39 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 8040 SC Myers and others lsquoWetland Management in New Zealand Are Current Approaches and Policies

Sustaining Wetland Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapesrsquo (2013) 56 Ecol Eng 10741 For description at Firth of Thames site see B Brownell J Dahm and M Graeme Priorities and Related

Actions for the Sustainable Management of the Firth of Thames Ramsar site Muddy Feet Phase II Keep theBirds Coming (Environment Waikato Technical Report 200815 2008) 14

42 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson [2009] DCR 827 CRI-2007-039-927 27 May 2009(Kopuatai)

496 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 7: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

that checks are routinely made on the threats to wetland sites and changes in theircondition However we will now see that in New Zealandrsquos case Ramsarrsquos reach islimited

32 The Reduced Effect of RamsarThough Ramsar creates a strong foundation upon which to build wetland protectionthis research establishes that protection is hindered in the New Zealand example bya lack of strong obligation at the international level and a corresponding lack ofrigour in implementation at the national level The limits of site-based protection arealso demonstrated as are difficulties in obtaining integrated and consistentprotection

The value of Ramsar to shift or lessen harmful influences is weakened by its fail-ure to adopt active precautionary and preventive language and by its employment ofthe term lsquowise usersquo Balancing development with protection and promoting wise uselsquoas far as possiblersquo is a potential contributing factor to the failure of New Zealand toeffectively limit wetland degradation and failure to achieve this balance is exacer-bated by the lack of clear guidance in the implementing legislation and associatedpolicy32

In addition a persuasive lsquoas far as possiblersquo approach driven by the notion of wiseuse dilutes potency and renders aspects of implementation more fluidComprehensive incorporation into domestic law is vital to implementation TheNew Zealand response although characterised by some genuine effort on behalf ofthe administering agencies is also marred by a range of failures including thosecanvassed in subsequent paragraphs

New Zealand has few Ramsar designated sites only six compared with 169 in theUK 64 in Australia and 45 in Ireland33 In consideration of area the six NewZealand sites encompassing approximately 54 400 ha are dwarfed in comparison toCanada with 13 066 675 ha Australia with 8 117 145 ha34 and the UK with 785361 ha35

Although not a matter to which the state of existing sites can be attributed limiteddesignation may suggest a limited enthusiasm for protection DOC as the respon-sible agency is currently in the process of establishing further criteria for prioritisingRamsar site nominations36

A 2013 amendment to the Conservation Act 1987 has changed the manner inwhich Ramsar wetlands will be classified Previously classified by the Minister of

detecting reporting and responding to change in wetland ecological characterrsquo Resolution X16 RamsarConvention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 31

32 Controller and Auditor-General Department of Conservation Prioritising and Partnering to ManageBiodiversity (Office of the Auditor-General 2012) 43

33 Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2013 (n 21) 10134 ibid35 Joint Nature Conservation Committee lsquoUK Ramsar Sitesrsquo (2013) lthttpjnccdefragovukpage-

1388gt accessed 21 June 201536 Tracie Dean-Speirs and others Analysis of Decisions from the 10th Meeting of Contracting Parties (COP10)

to the Ramsar Convention Ramsar (2011) 8 see also Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe Ramsar Strategic Plan2009ndash2015rsquo Resolution X1 Strategy 21 Ramsar site designation Department of Conservation NationalReport on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands by New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2014) 41

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 495

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Conservation by notice section 18AB now provides that such decisions will be madeby the Executive Council which will engage all Cabinet members in the classificationDilution of the power of the Minister of Conservation in this manner could poten-tially have a chilling effect upon further Ramsar designations particularly where theareas are mineral rich or similarly suitable for exploitive purposes

Designation of the six current sites arose through ad hoc responses to localapplications and with no strategic prioritisation A series of important shorebirdsites37 currently lack Ramsar protection despite ranking highly in the recent ecosys-tem prioritisation exercise carried out by DOC with several outranking designatedsites38 Encouragement by DOC of new Ramsar site nominations that fulfil nationalobjectives is a medium priority implementation action arising from COP10 andwork is underway to achieve this39 Designation as a Ramsar site is a common factorwhich triggers protective provisions in resource management plans prepared underthe Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) the legislation responsible for environ-mental management in New Zealand

The effect of Ramsar is significantly reduced due to inability of site-based legalprotection to extend to limiting the impacts of activities beyond the site Using theFirth of Thames as an example but drawing heavily on parallels from KopuataiWhangamarino and Waituna Lagoon it is apparent that designated sites suffer aplight relatively similar to unprotected lands and water At the sites birds areexposed to a range of threats caused inter alia by development and activity in thecatchment from sectors such agriculture and forestry40 Many impacts stem from offsite and create adverse conditions at the site These include habitat loss and modifi-cation due to degradation of water quality sedimentation vegetative changedrainage flood protection works presence of mammalian predators and pollutionThe impacts threaten the wrybill dotterel and godwit inhabiting the Ramsar site41

The ecosystem and habitat values protected by site designation may extendbeyond the boundaries of the protected site and onto private land42 In the case ofWhangamarino parcels of private land sit at the heart of the wetland The bounda-ries of the site-based protection may fail to reflect the flow of ecological processesand the movement of species thus creating a further vulnerability in protective effectThe Firth of Thames site is situated largely below mean high water springs and thusfails to incorporate much of the landward margins which species such as the wrybillgodwit and dotterel make use of This problem is accentuated as is the case in NewZealand where protection is premised less upon species threat status than habitat

37 JE Dowding and SJ Moore Habitat Networks of Indigenous Shorebirds in New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2006) 10 Woodley personal communication (August 2013)

38 Department of Conservation Data Layer ManagementUnits_2013Rankings_PublicViewOnly 2013accessed October 2013

39 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 8040 SC Myers and others lsquoWetland Management in New Zealand Are Current Approaches and Policies

Sustaining Wetland Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapesrsquo (2013) 56 Ecol Eng 10741 For description at Firth of Thames site see B Brownell J Dahm and M Graeme Priorities and Related

Actions for the Sustainable Management of the Firth of Thames Ramsar site Muddy Feet Phase II Keep theBirds Coming (Environment Waikato Technical Report 200815 2008) 14

42 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson [2009] DCR 827 CRI-2007-039-927 27 May 2009(Kopuatai)

496 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 8: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

Conservation by notice section 18AB now provides that such decisions will be madeby the Executive Council which will engage all Cabinet members in the classificationDilution of the power of the Minister of Conservation in this manner could poten-tially have a chilling effect upon further Ramsar designations particularly where theareas are mineral rich or similarly suitable for exploitive purposes

Designation of the six current sites arose through ad hoc responses to localapplications and with no strategic prioritisation A series of important shorebirdsites37 currently lack Ramsar protection despite ranking highly in the recent ecosys-tem prioritisation exercise carried out by DOC with several outranking designatedsites38 Encouragement by DOC of new Ramsar site nominations that fulfil nationalobjectives is a medium priority implementation action arising from COP10 andwork is underway to achieve this39 Designation as a Ramsar site is a common factorwhich triggers protective provisions in resource management plans prepared underthe Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) the legislation responsible for environ-mental management in New Zealand

The effect of Ramsar is significantly reduced due to inability of site-based legalprotection to extend to limiting the impacts of activities beyond the site Using theFirth of Thames as an example but drawing heavily on parallels from KopuataiWhangamarino and Waituna Lagoon it is apparent that designated sites suffer aplight relatively similar to unprotected lands and water At the sites birds areexposed to a range of threats caused inter alia by development and activity in thecatchment from sectors such agriculture and forestry40 Many impacts stem from offsite and create adverse conditions at the site These include habitat loss and modifi-cation due to degradation of water quality sedimentation vegetative changedrainage flood protection works presence of mammalian predators and pollutionThe impacts threaten the wrybill dotterel and godwit inhabiting the Ramsar site41

The ecosystem and habitat values protected by site designation may extendbeyond the boundaries of the protected site and onto private land42 In the case ofWhangamarino parcels of private land sit at the heart of the wetland The bounda-ries of the site-based protection may fail to reflect the flow of ecological processesand the movement of species thus creating a further vulnerability in protective effectThe Firth of Thames site is situated largely below mean high water springs and thusfails to incorporate much of the landward margins which species such as the wrybillgodwit and dotterel make use of This problem is accentuated as is the case in NewZealand where protection is premised less upon species threat status than habitat

37 JE Dowding and SJ Moore Habitat Networks of Indigenous Shorebirds in New Zealand (Department ofConservation 2006) 10 Woodley personal communication (August 2013)

38 Department of Conservation Data Layer ManagementUnits_2013Rankings_PublicViewOnly 2013accessed October 2013

39 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 8040 SC Myers and others lsquoWetland Management in New Zealand Are Current Approaches and Policies

Sustaining Wetland Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapesrsquo (2013) 56 Ecol Eng 10741 For description at Firth of Thames site see B Brownell J Dahm and M Graeme Priorities and Related

Actions for the Sustainable Management of the Firth of Thames Ramsar site Muddy Feet Phase II Keep theBirds Coming (Environment Waikato Technical Report 200815 2008) 14

42 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson [2009] DCR 827 CRI-2007-039-927 27 May 2009(Kopuatai)

496 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 9: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

protection New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation and astatutory species listing process for designating species at risk The Wildlife Act 1953which ostensibly affords absolute protection to species is deficient in a number of re-spects including effective implementation43 As a result protection tends to default tothe RMA the principal legislation controlling resource use development and protec-tion in New Zealand By virtue of section 6(c) the focus falls upon recognising andproviding for the habitats of indigenous species as a matter of national importance asopposed to species

Generic site-based protection may also fail to recognise particular site attributesAt the Firth of Thames site the Ramsar site designation does not recognise orspatially differentiate between particular values within that area such as the combin-ation of a high value foraging ground paired with an effective high tide roost44

Identification of particular values may increase visibility and protection in domesticprotection schemes

As demonstrated through New Zealand case law in many instances humanactivity and private development occur intensively on the boundaries of the Ramsarsites45 and some within these46 The land bounding sites is commonly heavilymodified by the presence of flood protection works drainage channels and vegeta-tion clearance stock grazing and other farming activities Failure to control adjacentland uses impacts habitat quality and causes species disturbance47 Buffer zones toprotect sites are not in evident use as is recommended in Ramsar guidance and incontemporary legislative schemes48 Case law demonstrates problems with cleardemarcation of the sites the need for interpretation on the actual sites education oflandowners in proximity to the site and within the catchment and the value thatestablishment of protective buffer zones would have in reducing the impacts fromadjoining activities49 At the Firth of Thames site it is evident that illegal grazingreclamation and vehicle use has been occurring within the boundaries of the site formany years50 The activities have occurred despite being within a sensitive areawhere livestock presence is a prohibited activity and vehicle use discretionary requir-ing resource consent under the Regional Coastal Plan51 Furthermore although theterrestrial related Regional Plan applies priority stock exclusion rules to a number of

43 Wallace (n 4) conclusions44 Keith Woodley Shorebirds of New Zealand Sharing the Margins (Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd 2012) 23145 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (n 42) Southland Regional Council v Belling DC

Invercargill CRI-2010-025-004368 CRI-2010-025-004366 10 June 2011 (AwaruaWaituna) andSouthland Regional Council v Pantas Corporation DC Invercargill CRI-2007-025-3342 (AwaruaWaituna)

46 For instance the grazing of stock reclamation drainage works vehicle access and rubbish disposal seefor example Waikato Regional Council Abatement Notice issued to Flint Farms Ltd pursuant to s 324RMA 16 August 2013 DOC2800980

47 Brownell Dahm and Graeme (n 41)48 Ramsar Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex X Barbara Lausche and others The Legal Aspects of

Connectivity Conservation A Concept Paper (IUCN 2013) 9249 For example Waikato Regional Council v Cookson (activities bounding Kopuatai) (n 42) Southland

Regional Council v Belling (discharge in proximity to AwaruaWaituna) (n 45) and Waikato RegionalCouncil v Tuitahi Farms Ltd DC Auckland CRI-2014-075-000155 3 July 2014 (discharge in proximity toFirth of Thames)

50 Waikato Regional Council 2013 (abatement notice) (n 46)51 Waikato Regional Council Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2005) rr 1629 and 1663

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 497

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 10: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

priority water courses entering the site the coverage is not entirely comprehensiveand the area is lacking supporting buffer zones52 Effective land use planning whichincludes neighbouring areas within protective mechanisms is clearly lacking in theNew Zealand example In conjunction with a recommendation for implementationof Ramsar site buffer zones in New Zealand a more nuanced approach to spatialzoning of the site and surrounding areas would also be beneficial53

Deterioration in ecological character and the ongoing impact of illegal activitiesalso suggest a failure to follow the extensive Ramsar guidance prepared to assess andmonitor sites as well as sufficiently applying guidance as to ecological outcome indi-cators to assess the implementation effectiveness of the Convention54 FurthermoreNew Zealand is insufficiently describing and reporting changes to ecological charac-ter and resultant management responses as required by the Convention55 There isa need to assess the adequacy of monitoring currently being conducted at the sitesand for updated information sheets (RIS) to be filed for the respective sites56

These are largely matters that may also be the subject of a management planwhich can define the characteristics of a site identify the pressures developresponses allocate roles and assess funding needs and arrangements Such plans arerecognised in the Ramsar Convention guidance as fundamental to achieving lsquowiseusersquo and are intended to be integrated into the public development planning systemat local regional or national level57 The Ramsar Convention does not howeverrequire their preparation Consequently the Manawatu Ramsar site is the only onein New Zealand to have a current dedicated management plan although morecoarsely framed provisions within the Waikato Conservancy Management Strategyare adopted as management plans in the 2014 report back on the Convention58

Important opportunities are lost to put into force a Ramsar Convention resolutionthat recognises lsquothat site-based management planning should be one element of amulti-scalar approach to wise use planning and management and should be linkedwith broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning rsquo59

Insufficient comprehensive management planning has knock-on effects for theday-to-day management of sites (including pest management) because of precariousfunding situations At the Firth of Thames site this task largely falls to the Miranda

52 Waikato Regional Council Waikato Regional Plan (Waikato Regional Council 2007) r 4354 andWaikato Regional Plan Priority Catchments for Stock Exclusion - GIS Layer the spatial data representingPriority Catchments for Stock Exclusion Data was derived by Waikato Regional Council from LINZ andNIWAMFE data access date October 2013

53 Zeng recommends the adoption (and enhancement) by Ramsar of the UNESCO-MAB BiosphereReserve zonation system to enable greater utility and flexibility Qing Zeng and others lsquoPerspectives onZonation in Ramsar Sites and Other Protected Areas Making Sense of the Tower of Babelrsquo (2014) 4Open J Ecol 788

54 Ramsar (2005) lsquoAn Integrated Framework for Wetland Inventory Assessment and MonitoringrsquoResolution IX1 Annex E Ramsar (2005) lsquoEcological ldquooutcome-orientedrdquo Indicators for Assessing theImplementation Effectiveness of the Ramsar Conventionrsquo Resolution IX1 Annex D

55 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4656 art 32 Ramsar (2008) lsquoThe status of sites in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importancersquo

Resolution X13 18 19 and Annex 1 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 2457 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 1958 Department of Conservation 2014 (n 36) 4359 Resolution VIII14 ch VI (n 25) Annex 20

498 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 11: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

Naturalistsrsquo Trust a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which runs theShorebird Centre adjacent to the site

As part of its Natural Heritage Management System DOC has developed newtools to optimise the management of threatened species and to prioritise the man-agement of ecosystems by grouping them into lsquoEcosystem Management Unitsrsquo60 Interms of ranking a 2013 geographical information system (GIS) dataset indicates61

that Kopuatai Farewell Spit and Manawatu are Ramsar sites that will receive prioritywithin the next four years The presence of threatened species at these sites may intime act as an additional ground for prioritisation Currently however the rankingsdemonstrate that designation as a site of international importance may not be par-ticularly important in setting management priorities

Although the 2014 National Report on the Implementation of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands by New Zealand records lsquoTaken in their entirety the ecolo-gical character of New Zealandrsquos Ramsar sites has not changed significantly since thelast reportrsquo it is clear that degradation at sites continues largely attributable to re-source use and development within catchments62 Significant concern exists relatingto high anthropogenic nitrogen loads stemming from agricultural activity in thecatchments Consequent ocean acidification of the Firth of Thames particularlyfrom the Waihou and Piako Rivers which discharge into the Ramsar site is an acceler-ating problem63

The situation at Waituna Lagoon is so serious that scientists warn of the real riskof a catastrophic change in state due to the excessive nutrient loads64 exacerbated bya significant rate of conversion to dairy farming in the southland Region DOCrsquos2012 National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands byNew Zealand described these potential threats to ecological character as lsquoan emergingchallengersquo65

Policy and regulatory failure to limit ecological damage to wetland ecosystems inNew Zealandrsquos agricultural landscapes documented by Myers and others noted afailure to meet Ramsar objectives to prevent further wetland loss66 In addition rulesin implementing plans were uneven in strength less than half had strong regulationand monitoring hence implementation was sparse67 Myers documents ongoing lossof wetlands and makes a number of recommendations including integrating andstrengthening national legislation and policy direction preparation of strong national

60 John Leathwick Elaine Wright and Andy Cox Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management (Department ofConservation 2012) John Leathwick and Elaine Wright Integrated Prioritisation of Ecosystems and Species(Department of Conservation 2012)

61 Department of Conservation Data Layer Management Units_PublicViewOnly_Extract7Aug2013 201362 Department of Conservation (n 36) 4963 John Zeldis lsquoLinking Ocean Acidification Eutrophication and Land Usersquo in TL Capson and J Guinotte

(eds) Future Proofing New Zealandrsquos Shellfish Aquaculture Monitoring and Adaptation to OceanAcidification New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 136 (Ministry for PrimaryIndustries 2014) 32 Hauraki Gulf Forum State of the Gulf (Hauraki Gulf Forum 2014) 12

64 Peter Scanes Nutrient Loads to Protect Environmental Values in Waituna Lagoon Southland NZ(Environment Southland 2012) 1

65 Department of Conservation National Report on the Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlandsby New Zealand (Department of Conservation 2012) 9

66 Myers and others (n 40) 10767 ibid

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 499

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 12: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

policy statements which direct bottom lines for protecting wetlands and strongerrules in regional and district plans to protect wetlands coupled with more effectivemonitoring and enforcement68

An amended National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 hassince been introduced69 This is intended to strengthen protection of freshwater andinclude provision for lsquobottom linesrsquo for ecosystem health While widely recognised asa necessary initiative70 early concerns have been expressed including the failure toestablish a framework for managing wetlands the need for biological indicatorswhich reflect the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and bottom lines associatedwith more integrative measures of ecosystem health such as fish and insectpopulations71 The gap surrounding policy for wetland management is deepened bythe failure of New Zealand to revise the outdated National Wetland Policy 1986 toreflect the extensive Ramsar guidance material

The example of the Firth of Thames at the interface of land and water and thepublic and private domains draws into sharp focus the amalgam of agency responsi-bility for the site and associated values a problem replicated at other Ramsar sitesImplementation of Ramsar is the responsibility of DOC as is species management atthe site pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 and the Conservation Act 1987 Yet alarge proportion of the site lies within the coastal marine area administered by theRegional Council Integrated management of the catchment is the responsibility ofthe Regional Council which is also responsible for flood control in the catchmentcreating a dual role and at times conflicting objectives pertaining to preservingbiodiversity and managing flood waters

In terms of land use the site is dissected and two separate District Councils controlland bordering the site In addition the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 providesfor special recognition of the area and the Hauraki Gulf Forum is tasked with manag-ing the gulf and its catchments The multiple responsibilities and divisions create silosand limit opportunity for strategic conservation planning particularly across the publicand private estates In particular what is missing is strategic planning for lsquothreatenedrsquoand lsquoat riskrsquo species driven by the needs of the species as opposed to the silos of theplans and administering agencies72 A recent analysis of implementation of Ramsarnotes both the need to refine administrative arrangement to implement it and toimprove the level of coordination among wetland managers government agencies and

68 ibid 11769 Ministry for the Environment Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater

Management 2011 A Discussion Document (Ministry for the Environment 2013)70 And recommended by the Land and Water Forum 2012 Land and Water Forum Report of the Land and

Water Forum A Fresh Start for Fresh Water (2010) Land and Water Forum Second Report of the Landand Water Forum Setting Limits for Water Quality and Quantity and Freshwater Policy - and Plan-MakingThrough Collaboration (2012)

71 New Zealand Freshwater Sciences Society lsquoMedia Statement from the New Zealand Freshwater SciencesSociety Response to the Proposed Amendments to the National Policy Statement for FreshwaterManagementrsquo 2013 and Science Media Centre lsquoFreshwater National Standards set ndash Experts Respondrsquolthttpwwwsciencemediacentreconz20140703freshwater-national-standards-set-experts-re-spondgt accessed 21 June 2015

72 Wallace (n 4) 442

500 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 13: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

stakeholders73 Greater interaction between DOC and Regional councils at thestrategic level would benefit the protection of threatened species The lack of nationaldirection in the form of a national wetlands policy or national Wetlands Action Planalso limits an effective shared responsibility approach74

33 Ramsar SummaryThe Ramsar Convention could be more effectively implemented in New ZealandThere is a clear need to designate further important sites prepare a NationalWetlands Plan make effective management plans for existing sites obtain securefunding for site management and develop buffer zone systems to better protect sitevalues These are pressing issues yet the greatest problem is the failure to adequatelymanage factors external to the Ramsar sites such as farming and water quality lossEcological character of the key sites continues to degrade and the failure to effect-ively address the underlying causes of this loss evidences a lack of commitment onthe part of New Zealand Significantly more could be made of this Convention tobenefit birds in New Zealand through greater engagement implementation and inte-gration across the landscape Having identified that the Ramsar approach is weak-ened by these factors attention now turns to the impact of the CBD

4 T H E C B DSimilar to Ramsar the CBD75 has considerable potential for delivering benefits tothe case study species As a framework convention it provides significant guidanceand leadership in developing a global approach to the conservation of biodiversityThe CBD measures are extensive and directed at critical problems to achieve thereduction of biodiversity decline

41 The Reduced Effect of the CBDDespite this positive direction the targets set pursuant to CBD have not been metglobally76 This article argues that a lack of strong obligation at the convention levelhampers the effect of the convention and is compounded by insufficient implementa-tion at the national level As a means of strengthening the obligation upon nationstates and improving the status of the case study birds the Aichi targets are investi-gated but again problems are identified with reduced effect due to limits on obliga-tion and potential flow-on effects in implementation At the implementing nationallevel a need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss is identified as wellas a need to more effectively regulate damaging industry practices

CBD obligations are cast on a more general level enabling a degree of autonomyand allowing for varying capacity of implementing nations77 The near-universal

73 Controller and Auditor-General Report of the Controller and Auditor-General Tumuaki o te Mana ArotakeMeeting International Environmental Obligations (Audit Office 2001) 58 Dean-Speirs and others (n 36) 6Controller and Auditor-General 2012 (n 32) 42

74 Controller and Auditor-General (n 73) 5775 The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity 1760 UNTS 79 (1992) art 876 United Nations Environment Programme GEO5 Global Environment Outlook Environment for the Future

we Want (UNEP 2012) 8377 Harrop (n 1) 119ndash20

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 501

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 14: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

participation in the CBD and the compromises inherent in such an approach limitthe effectiveness of the Convention The words used are general and enabling asopposed to applying any strong prescriptive obligation Cast as loose obligationssuch as lsquoto promotersquo protection rehabilitation or recovery or to lsquoregulatersquo orlsquomanagersquo processes and activities the wording gives no real indication of the strengthor intended efficacy of the measures exhorted78 The lack of direction pertaining todegree of obligation leaves the choice about the level of protection open to theimplementing organisation

Where the causes of loss are known (as many are) a loose obligation must limitresponse with respect to actively protecting species Moreover the CBD is limitingin the extent to which it utilises the principles of precaution prevention and avoid-ance which influences the extent of obligation upon contracting parties The CBDdoes little to support a strong active precautionary approach to the loss of threat-ened species Although noting the precautionary principle in its preamble the CBDapplies a weak and non-active version which seeks to prevent lack of full scientificcertainty being used as a reason to postpone measures to avoid or minimize a threatof significant reduction or loss of biodiversity No binding articles drive precaution-ary action As the CBD has developed the precautionary principle has been appliedin a range of additional decisions including marine and coastal biodiversity79 invasivealien species80 the ecosystem approach81 and guidelines on sustainable use82

Similarly no principle of prevention figures strongly in the CBD The Preambleidentifies the critical need to lsquoanticipate prevent and attack the causes of significantreduction or loss of biodiversity at sourcersquo However the prevention of harm to spe-cies is a goal that is not explicitly stated in the Articles The obligations tend to ex-tend to the regulation and management of activities although Article 10(b) requiresParties to lsquo[a]dopt measures relating to the use of biological resources to avoid orminimize adverse impact on biological diversityrsquo

New Zealandrsquos two most recent reports on meeting the CBD obligations recordmixed results with clear under-performance regarding species protection includingfailing to achieve the global targets related to threatened species status and in termsof the trends in abundance and distribution of selected species83 Of the case studyspecies the kokako alone has seen an upward trend in conservation status althoughthe bird remains conservation dependent Failure to adequately control predatorshabitat loss and modification and fisheries bycatch continue to limit the case studyspecies It is recognised that considerable difficulty exists in managing and protecting

78 For example arts 8 (d) and (f)79 CBD (1995) lsquoConservation and Sustainable use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversityrsquo Decision

II10 SBSTTA I880 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Annex Decision VI23 and

CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision V881 CBD (2000) lsquoEcosystem Approachrsquo Decision V682 CBD (2004) lsquoSustainable Usersquo Decision VII1283 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fourth National Report to the United Nations Convention on

Biological Diversity (2010) 57ndash58 lthttp wwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-04-enpdfgt accessed 20June 2015 New Zealand Government New Zealandrsquos Fifth National Report to the United NationsConvention on Biological Diversity (2014) 9 lthttpwwwcbdintdocworldnznz-nr-05-enpdfgt ac-cessed 21 June 2015

502 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 15: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

species on the public conservation estate (approximately one-third of New Zealandland area) with the size of the task of conserving species being beyond the scope ofthe resources allocated84 This problem is accentuated on private land wherealthough species continue to be lsquoownedrsquo by the Crown any concomitant protectionand management effort is reduced Technically species are afforded lsquoabsolute protec-tionrsquo by the Wildlife Act 1953 yet elsewhere I have identified significant limitationsin protection and implementation deficiencies85 Particular issues arise in relation toresource use and development and permitting for incidental loss In addition theRamsar examples canvassed above demonstrate New Zealandrsquos failure to adequatelycapture and control the externalities of resource use and development and section 5will discuss similar problems arising from incidental fisheries mortality

The CBD provides New Zealand with a clear mandate to apply an ecosystemsapproach Yet the problems identified in the Firth of Thames site suggest that thereare limitations to achieving a holistic approach in protecting ecological integrity andto securing an ecosystems approach in conjunction with lsquowise usersquo Bringing thisproblem back to the parent Conventions is illuminating Despite some significantattempts at integrating the CBD and Ramsar recent commentators note that thatthere is lsquoremarkably little linkage on common issues across the two programmesrsquo86

A failure to achieve cross-sectoral and integrated approaches in landscape andseascapes runs counter to the overarching ecosystem approach

To resolve the deepening biodiversity crisis and strengthen approaches tosustainable use the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the CBD identifiedan updated set of targets (the Aichi biodiversity targets) and approved a revised stra-tegic plan for biodiversity for the 2011ndash20 period87 Parties are obliged to translatethis strategic plan into national biodiversity strategy and action plans prepared pursu-ant to Article 6 of the CBD Responses to previous targets88 were recognised asbeing inadequate due to an insufficient scale upon which to address the pressuresand insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies strategies pro-grammes and actions to enable the underlying drivers to be adequately addressed89

Lack of financial human and technical resources were also identified as limiting im-plementation of the convention90 These are problems which not unexpectedly arealso identified in relation to Ramsar The Aichi targets are introduced to addressthese problems and raise the bar for biodiversity protection Achievement of thetargets would significantly improve the outlook for the six case study birds as theymore rigorously address threats to the birds

84 Controller and Auditor-General (n 32) 10 Liana Joseph and others lsquoImproving Methods for AllocatingResources Among Threatened Species The Case for a New National Approach in New Zealandrsquo (2008)14 Pacific Conserv Biol 154 155

85 Wallace (n 4) s 73386 Nick Davidson and David Coates lsquoThe Ramsar Convention and Synergies for Operationalizing the

Convention on Biological Diversityrsquos Ecosystem Approach for Wetland Conservation and Wise Usersquo(2011) 14 J Int Wildlife L Policy 204

87 CBD (2010) lsquoStrategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020rsquo Decision X288 Specifically the 2010 biodiversity target see Decision X2 (n 91) cl (I) (7)89 See n 87 cl (I)(5)90 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (I)(5) amp (6)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 503

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 16: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

The Aichi targets are stronger and more directive as to the obligation cast thanthe parent Convention Yet they remain aspirational and flexible reliant upon theestablishment of national or regional targets for their implementation91 Given theNew Zealand Ramsar response the lack of binding legal obligation raises an immedi-ate concern It is currently unclear how New Zealand intends to proceed on thisissue as a revised National Biodiversity Strategy is yet to be released

Target 12 suggests immediate gain by 2020 for the dotterel black petrel andwrybill as it provides lsquoBy 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has beenprevented and their conservation status particularly of those most in decline hasbeen improved and sustainedrsquo92 However it is tempered by lsquoparticularly of thosemost in declinersquo which may provide justification to contracting parties to prioritisethe critical as opposed to the vulnerable This may not provide sufficient momentumand response for species such as the black petrel or dotterel

Target 5 includes the requirement that the rate of loss of all natural habitatsincluding forests be at least halved by 2020 and lsquowhere feasiblersquo brought close tozero with an emphasis upon preventing the loss of high-biodiversity value habitatssuch as forests and wetlands93 The technical rationale for the target defines loss toinclude degradation and fragmentation94 In the New Zealand example this isparticularly important as a significant issue now is not so much the loss of primaryforests rather the need for intensive pest management Other insidious forms of dam-age and incidental loss threaten each of the study species The New Zealand dotterelhabitat is threatened by the extension of coastal development and associated disturb-ance the wrybill likewise through the loss of aerial coastal and riverine habitat95 Thisform of loss occurs on an incremental basis and builds cumulative effects over time96

Two clear limitations stem from Target 5 The first is the lack of full ability tomeasure the rate and extent of habitat loss and the second is the use of the excep-tional words lsquowhere feasiblersquo While the area of land and wetland incrementally lostcan be measured loss arising from the introduction to the area of human activity andassociated cargo such as machines infrastructure and pets is not so readily capturedand accordingly less readily stemmed Although the monitoring of bird species has ahigher profile relative to other species the task is constrained by various factorsincluding scarcity difficulty of terrain nocturnal habits small population size andextent of conservation funding and priority97 This is problematic as it is not possibleto measure the loss of something that is not known to exist Policy directed at habitatloss and threats to species needs to be underpinned by stronger evidence of theconsequences of human activity on species to improve prospects for co-existence

91 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) (IV) (13) For discussion on the failure of the CBD to apply binding legal obli-gations as opposed to targets see Harrop and Pritchard (n 1) 474

92 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal C Target 1293 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Annex IV94 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) Technical Rationale COP1027Add195 Wallace (n 4) ch 4 Woodley (n 44) 178 19196 Woodley (n 44) 178 19197 William Lee Matt McGlone and Elaine Wright Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring A Review of

National and International Systems and a Proposed Framework for Future Biodiversity Monitoring bythe Department of Conservation (Landcare Research Contract Report LC0405122 (unpublished)2005) 41 48

504 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 17: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

As well as habitat loss the Aichi targets address specific sectoral damage andmodification to the environment Target 6 requires that lsquofisheries have no significantadverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts offisheries on stocks species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limitsrsquo98

Elsewhere I have concluded that dismantling a legislative sectoral defence99 imple-mentation of marine spatial zoning controls and additional mitigation measures arerequired in order to secure this target in the case of the black petrel100 Target 8 re-quires that lsquoBy 2020 pollution including from excess nutrients has been brought tolevels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversityrsquo101 This targetproduces benefits to all case study species but it would particularly counter the dam-age currently suffered by wetland and marine species The example of the Firth ofThames indicates that significant additional controls upon agricultural dischargewould be required in order to abate the current extensive nutrient pollution

Target 9 deals with invasive alien predators and directs that lsquoBy 2020 invasivealien species and pathways are identified and prioritized priority species are con-trolled or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent theirintroduction and establishmentrsquo102 This strengthens the original obligation con-tained in Article 8(h) of the CBD and is supported by a programme of work andguiding principles103 The key determinant for benefit to the case study species inimplementing this target will be the interpretation of lsquopriority speciesrsquo and the levelof eradication and control applied Due to the pressures of alien invasive species it isprojected that lsquofew of the current indigenous New Zealand forest birds will persiston the mainland without predator control on a vastly larger scale than currentlyundertakenrsquo104

Guiding principle 13 (Eradication) provides lsquoWhere it is feasible eradication isoften the best course of action to deal with the introduction and establishment ofinvasive alien speciesrsquo105 When eradication is not feasible principle 15 supportscontrol measures that focus on reducing the damage caused as well as reducing thenumber of the invasive alien species A stronger and more effective obligation would

98 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 699 Where the incidental loss arises as part of a fishing operation s 68B(4)(b) of the Wildlife Act 1953

operates as a defence provided all necessary reporting requirements were fulfilled100 Wallace (n 4) conclusions101 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 8102 CBD Decision X2 (n 87) cl (IV) (13) Strategic Goal B Target 9103 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex Principles 1ndash3 CBD (1998) lsquoReport and Recommendations of the

Third Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice andInstructions by the Conference of the Parties to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical andTechnological Advicersquo Decision IV1 C CBD (2000) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitatsor Speciesrsquo Decision V8 CBD (2002) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or SpeciesrsquoDecision VII13 CBD (2006) lsquoAlien Species that Threaten Ecosystems Habitats or Species (Article 8(H)) Further Consideration of Gaps and Inconsistencies in the International Regulatory FrameworkrsquoDecision VIII27 CBD (2008) lsquoIn-Depth Review Of Ongoing Work on Alien Species that ThreatenEcosystems Habitats or Speciesrsquo Decision IX4 CBD (2010) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision X38CBD (2012) lsquoInvasive Alien Speciesrsquo Decision XI28

104 John Innes and others lsquoPredation and Other Factors Currently Limiting New Zealand Forest Birdsrsquo(2010) 34 New Zeal J Ecol 86 105

105 CBD Decision VI23 (n 80) Annex

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 505

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 18: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

assert a requirement for the control of alien species to levels compatible with increas-ing populations and range of threatened species and to prevent additional speciesbeing classed as lsquothreatenedrsquo

The New Zealand response pursuant to the Biosecurity Act 1993 as amended bythe Biosecurity Law Reform Act 2012 and associated pest management strategiesand plans is not directed at full eradication Obligations imposed upon private landowners and the Crown are tentative in recognition of the scale of the problem andthe economic cost The imposition of good neighbour rules106 to manage pests thatcause external costs to other land holders is in principle a progressive move althoughthe extent of the obligation on landowners is less clear due to the desire to balanceproperty rights and obligations107

42 CBD SummaryDespite extensive guidance in principle weak directive obligations inhibit the forceof the CBD Nevertheless a significant impact of the CBD arises from the bindingobligation upon Parties to produce national biodiversity strategies and actionplans108 This produces a strong national focus regarding implementation of theCBD New Zealand is overdue in its obligation to file a reviewed national biodiver-sity strategy and action plans and its most recently released national report provideslittle confidence that the Aichi targets related to lsquothreatenedrsquo species will be met109

A more active and stringent approach to protecting lsquothreatenedrsquo species in NewZealand is called for The examination now turns to the final Convention and theprotection of migratory species

5 C O N V E N T I O N O N T H E C O N S E R V A T I O N O F M I G R A T O R Y S P E C I E SO F W I L D A N I M A L S

Protecting endangered migratory species is the focus of the Convention on theConservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) which came into forcein 2000110 The CMS enables States to work together to protect migratory routesthat extend beyond a nationrsquos borders With regard to the case study species theblack petrel sooty shearwater and the bar-tailed godwit qualify as migratory spe-cies111 although none are sufficiently endangered to warrant high-grade protectionof Appendix I

The most critical feature of CMS for the case study species lies in its structurewhich provides for binding obligations through the development of subsidiary agree-ments and the development of action plans and memoranda of understanding Thisis critical in view of species-specific threats for example the impact of bycatch to the

106 s 2(1) Biosecurity Act 1993107 For further discussion see Wallace (n 4) s 84108 art 6109 New Zealand Government 2014 (n 83)110 The 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 1651 UNTS 333 (1980)111 art 1 of the CMS defines migratory species as the entire population or any geographically separate part

of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild animals a significant proportion of whose mem-bers cyclically and predictably cross one or more national jurisdictional boundaries

506 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 19: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

black petrel112 which could be improved by specific adjustments such as the mannerin which a fishing line is weighted or the time that it is cast113

The CMS has 120 Parties and covers 573 species in Appendices I and IIConsequently individually crafted responses tuned to spatial and temporal needswill be required for many species While CMS indicates that this is the responsibilityof the implementing nations CMSrsquos structure enables some direction to be given atthe international level thus creating species-specific obligations on a wider level114

As will be examined a sharpened focus potentially delivers greater benefits for thosespecies within this frame yet may also cause a degree of uneven treatment for thosespecies without

The CMS enables a stepped approach to species protection providing the stron-gest protection for endangered species listed in Appendix I but using Appendix II toenable the provision of binding agreements for those species considered to haveunfavourable conservation status as defined by Article I115

Classification as an endangered species entails that the species be lsquoin danger ofextinction throughout all or a significant portion of its rangersquo116 The black petrelrsquosvulnerable status is insufficient for Appendix I classification yet a lesser form ofprotection is extended via classification in Appendix II due to its lsquounfavourableconservation statusrsquo117 An Appendix II listing is also available where the conserva-tion status of a species would significantly benefit from the international cooperationthat could be achieved through an international agreement118 and the bar-tailedgodwit not classified as lsquothreatenedrsquo in New Zealand receives Appendix II statuswhich is extended to the entire scolopacidae family In contrast the sooty shearwateris unlisted

51 The CMS ApproachArticle II of the CMS confirms the fundamental principle to conserve migratoryspecies and their habitats whenever possible and appropriate and includes acknow-ledgment by the Parties of lsquothe need to take action to avoid any migratory speciesbecoming endangeredrsquo Parties should promote research provide immediate protec-tion for Appendix I species and endeavour to conclude agreements for the conserva-tion and management of species listed in Appendix II119

112 Yvan Richard and Edward Abraham Risk of Commercial Fisheries to New Zealand Seabird Populations2006ndash07 to 2010ndash11 (New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No 109 2013) 23

113 Karen Baird and Biz Bell Bycatch of Black Petrel in New Zealand Fisheries (Fifth Meeting of the SeabirdBycatch Working Group Agreement for the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrel SBWG5 Doc 37Agenda Item 10 2013) 6

114 Richard Caddell lsquoInternational Law and the Protection of Migratory Wildlife An Appraisal of Twenty-five years of the Bonn Conventionrsquo (2005) 16 Colo J Int Environ L Poly 113 122 and 126

115 ibid 128 John Cooper and others lsquoThe Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsRationale History Progress and The Way Forwardrsquo (2006) 34 Mar Ornithol 1ndash5

116 art I (1) (e)117 The black petrel was added to Appendix II through amendment via COP6 Secretariat of the

Convention on Migratory Species lsquoAnnotated Appendices to the Conventionrsquo lthttpwwwcmsintdocumentsappendixadditions_table1pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

118 art IV (1)119 art II (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 507

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 20: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

Article III of the CMS providing for the listing in Appendix I of endangered spe-cies creates measures which states within the range of the species (Range States)must implement to protect the species120 The CMS also prohibits taking of theendangered species excepting a limited range of conditions121

The CMS creates relatively strong obligations but is tempered by words andphrases such as lsquowhenever possible and appropriatersquo lsquopromotersquo lsquoendeavourrsquo lsquoto theextent feasible and appropriatersquo which are open to interpretation122 Moreoverenabling minimisation as an alternative to avoidance regarding activities thatseriously impact migration reduces the strength of any obligation The restrictionslisted in Article III apply to Appendix I species and do not benefit the case study spe-cies in this research The CMS applies neither the precautionary nor the preventiveprinciple The scope and intent of the CMS has expanded and been augmented by aseries of resolutions which incorporate an ecosystem approach and simultaneouslyseek to address a range of issues threatening migratory species including the signifi-cant impact of fisheries bycatch123

Recently CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023124 adopts the CBD AichiTargets which drives a heightened intention to deliver in principle comprehensiveprotection on a range of fronts Decision X20 of the Conference of the Parties tothe CBD recognises CMS as the lead partner in the conservation and sustainable useof migratory species over their entire range and the Draft Strategic Plan incorporatesthis partnership approach125

If the targets proposed in the CMSrsquos Draft Strategic Plan 2015ndash2023 are compre-hensively implemented they offer considerable protection The targets are broad andinclude mainstreaming of awareness of values of migratory species and

120 art III (4) (b) amp (c) CMS121 art III (5) CMS122 Caddell (n 114) 117123 ibid 146 For examples of resolutions relevant to the case study species see CMS (1999) lsquoBy-catchrsquo

Resolution VI2 CMS (2002) lsquoImplementation of Resolution 62 on By-Catchrsquo Recommendation VI2CMS (2002) lsquoImpact Assessment and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII2 CMS (2002) lsquoOil Pollutionand Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII3 CMS (2002) lsquoElectrocution of Migratory Birdsrsquo ResolutionVII4 CMS (2002) lsquoWind Turbines and Migratory Speciesrsquo Resolution VII5 CMS (2002)lsquoImplications for CMS of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Resolutionrsquo VII10 CMS(2005) Climate Change and Migratory Species Resolution VIII13 CMS (2005) lsquoBycatchrsquo ResolutionVIII14 CMS (2005) lsquoMigratory Species and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenzarsquo Resolution 827CMS (2008) lsquoBycatchrsquo Decision IX18 CMS (2008) lsquoClimate Change Impacts on Migratory SpeciesrsquoResolution IX7 CMS (2008) Responding to the Challenge of emerging and re-emerging diseases inMigratory Species including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5 Resolution IX8 CMS (2011)lsquoThe Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Speciesrsquo Decision X3 CMS(2011) Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements ResolutionX10 CMS (2011) lsquoPower Lines and Migratory Birdsrsquo Decision X11 CMS (2011) lsquoGuidelines on theIntegration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) andOther Outcomes from CBD COP10rsquo Resolution X18 CMS (2011) lsquoMigratory Species Conservationin the Light of Climate Changersquo Resolution X19 CMS (2011) lsquoMinimizing the Risk of Poisoning toMigratory Birdsrsquo Resolution X26

124 CMS Inter-sessional Strategic Plan Working Group The Strategic Plan for Migratory Species 2015-2023Draft Skeleton for Consultation (UNEP CMS 2013) 3

125 CMS (2010) lsquoCooperation with Other Conventions and International Organizations and InitiativesrsquoDecision X20 cl 13 recalling Decision VI20 CMS Working Group 2013 ibid 1

508 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 21: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

conservation126 elimination or reform of harmful incentives and development ofincentives to conserve127 protection of all sites defined as being of critical import-ance for migratory species by 2020128 measures developed to minimise geneticerosion129 inclusion of priorities for conservation and management of migratory spe-cies in national biodiversity plans and strategies130 adoption of traditional knowledgeand knowledge improvements131 and mobilisation of resources132 Other morespecific targets relating to safe ecological limits133 protection of key areas134 elimin-ation of significant adverse effects from fisheries135 substantial reduction of multipleanthropogenic pressures136 and considerable improvement to the status of threat-ened migratory species137 offer considerable potential protection for the case studyspecies Achieving these targets would effectively eliminate most of the main pres-sures on the case study species

Success will be measured through implementation In consideration of the threatsposed to the black petrel and the sooty shearwater there is a considerable gapbetween the current position of the birds and the targets proposed The greatestbenefit from the CMS for the case study species derives from the focus on migratoryspecies and acknowledgment of the need to avoid endangering such species Moredirect protection however is left to the action of Appendix II agreements or moregeneral Memoranda of Understanding The next section considers the impact ofthose agreements

The CMS provides for two separate types of agreements lsquoAGREEMENTSrsquocreated pursuant to Article IV (3) concerning Appendix II species and lsquoagreementsrsquopursuant to Article IV (4) for any migratory population138 Guidelines forAGREEMENTS are set out in Article 5 of the CMS and provide for extensive meas-ures to be applied to the conservation of the species the subject of the agreementThe obligation on parties in respect of AGREEMENTS is to lsquoendeavour to concludersquowhere they would be of benefit and to give priority in creation to species withunfavourable conservation status139 This explains why the black petrel is the solecase study species to be the subject of an AGREEMENT to which New Zealand is aparty which will be discussed in the following section The bar-tailed godwit issubject to an AGREEMENT for part of its range through inclusion in the AfricanEurasian Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA)140 but New Zealand godwits are not

126 Targets 1 and 2127 Target 3128 Target 10129 Target 12130 Target 13131 Targets 14 and 15132 Target 16133 Target 5134 Target 6135 Target 7136 Target 8137 Target 9138 Caddell (n 114) 119139 art IV (3)140 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Waterbirds (1995)

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 509

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 22: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

within this range and therefore do not receive the additional protection of a bindingagreement For godwits in the South Pacific any coverage is pursuant to the non-binding flyways agreement of the Partnership for the East-Asian AustralasianFlyway141 which sits outside the CMS The Partnership is an informal initiative andthe partners are drawn from governmental and non-governmental agencies and theinternational business sector Conservation of migratory waterbirds for the benefit ofpeople and biodiversity is the key goal of the Partnership and the 2012-2016 EAAFPImplementation Strategy sets out a flyway wide framework to achieve the goal andobjectives of the Partnership142

52 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and PetrelsIn contrast to the position of the godwit New Zealand is a party to the Agreementon the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) and the black petrel is listedpursuant to Annex 1 as one of the 30 species to which the Agreement applies143

ACAP creates important binding obligations that elevate protective requirements forthis species ACAPrsquos objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservationstatus for albatrosses and petrels144 ACAP details a range of species protectionmeasures in conjunction with other methods employed to protect and restore habi-tat Parties are required to apply a precautionary approach and where there arethreats of serious or irreversible impacts lack of full scientific certainty should not beused as a reason for postponing conservation measures145

Elimination or control of non-native species detrimental to albatrosses and petrelis identified as a priority as is the requirement to develop and implement measuresto prevent remove minimise or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that mayinfluence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels146 Black petrel no longerbreed on mainland New Zealand sites due in no small part to the impact of alieninvasive species147 Control of predators to levels compatible with successful breed-ing on mainland sites would support restoration of the species to former rangeACAP also provides explicit support for implementation of the actions elaborated inthe UN Food and Agricultural Organisation International Plan of Action forReducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries148 Furthermore consid-erable associated work is carried out with agencies such as the Commission for theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)

141 Partnership for the Conservation of Migratory Waterbirds and the Sustainable Use of their Habitats inthe East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway lsquoPartnership Documentrsquo (2006) lthttpwwweaaflywaynetdocu-mentskeyeaafp-partnership-doc-v13pdfgt accessed 20 June 2015

142 East AsianndashAustralasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy 2012ndash2016 Adopted by the SixthMeeting of the Partners Palembang Indonesia 21 March 2012

143 CMS Secretariat The Agreement on the Conservation of Albatross and Petrel (2001) as Amended bythe Fourth Session of the Meeting of the Parties Lima Peru 23ndash27 April 2012

144 art II (1)145 art II (3)146 art III (1) (b) amp(c)147 R Francis and EA Bell Fisheries Risks to the Population Viability of Black Petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni)

(2010) 4 Wallace (n 4) ch 4148 art III (1)

510 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 23: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

Annex 2 of ACAP constitutes an Action Plan in terms of species conservation itprohibits the use of and trade in albatross and petrel or their eggs and fosters thedevelopment and implementation of conservation strategies for particular species orgroups149 ACAP further supports the control and where possible eradication ofnon-native taxa detrimental to petrel populations150 Incidental bycatch is alsotargeted and Parties to ACAP are obliged to take appropriate measures to reduce oreliminate the mortality of albatrosses and petrels resulting incidentally from fishingactivities151

The Annex to ACAP contains important habitat protection measures for includ-ing management plans in protected areas and pollution control at sea152 Parties arealso urged to develop management plans for the most important foraging and migra-tory habitats although the scope of these is potentially limited to pollution avoidanceand sustainable marine living resources153 Implementation of management plans inthe New Zealand context would benefit the black petrel

Where damaging fishing practices are occurring in specific marine areas and critic-ally impacting on a species Clause 233 supports a spatial andor temporal zoningrestriction upon those fishing practices Conservation priorities have also been identi-fied in reliance of a recently developed prioritisation framework designed to enableconservation effort to be directed at land-based and at-sea threats that are consideredto warrant conservation management priority Several fisheries that impact on theblack petrel are identified as priority threats154 although a recent report suggeststhat the assessment has excluded a fishery generating the highest proportion of riskto the bird155 Implementation of spatial and temporal zones is a measure whichwould significantly benefit the black petrel156 Greater visibility and implementationof clause 233 and Annex 1 cl 321 is needed

ACAPrsquos Annex is one of few international instruments that specifically considersthe issue of disturbance creating clear obligations to minimise disturbance and tokeep some areas in both marine and terrestrial habitats free of disturbance157 Inconsideration of tourism particularly in relation to proximity to breeding sites thestronger standard of avoidance is adopted as an alternative to just minimising theimpacts of disturbance158

CMS and ACAP instruments can significantly benefit the case study speciesbecause they have a range of well-targeted protective measures to be applied across

149 Annex 2 cl 111 and 113150 Annex 2 cl 142151 Annex 2 cl 321152 Annex 2 cl 221 amp cl 231153 Annex 2 cl 231 amp cl 232154 ACAP (2012) ACAP Conservation Priorities MoP4 Doc 17 Agenda Item 74 (2012)155 Baird and Bell (n 113) 1156 Black Petrel Action Group Black Petrel Briefing Note Ministers and Advisors (2013) The benefits of ef-

fective marine spatial planning are also recognised by the Parties to the CBD see for example (2012)lsquoMarine and coastal biodiversity sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activitiesvoluntary guidelines for environmental assessment and marine spatial planningrsquo Decision XI18 Notealso that fishing is excluded from restriction under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf(Environmental Effects) Act 2012 by s 20(5)(a) of that Act

157 Annex 2 cl 341158 Annex 2 cl 342

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 511

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 24: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

Range States they create species-specific agreements they raise the profile for listedspecies which induces heightened protection and potential funding they containobligations regarding research and monitoring and they focus on specific threatssuch as bycatch and disturbance Of particular importance is the decision made tolsquocommence engagements with a number of Regional Fishery ManagementOrganizations (RFMOs) which manage high-seas fisheries affecting southernseabirdsrsquo159

53 The Reduced Effect of the CMS and ACAPAs with Ramsar and the CBD CMS and ACAP are limited by a lack of force andinfluence The instruments could be considerably strengthened by applying an activeprecautionary principle strengthening the requirements for prevention of harm andrequiring avoidance of adverse effects This is clearly demonstrated in New Zealandby the current level of threat suffered by the black petrel from fisheries bycatch Theobligation to reduce in contrast to eliminate fisheries bycatch mortality (or at leastreduce to a level consistent with species recoveryincrease) provides an insufficientstandard to relieve the black petrel of the current significant burden arising throughincidental mortality For the petrel stronger measures are required in particularspatial zoning measures creating temporary fishing restrictions The privileging ofthe fishing industry is evident from the standard of control applied to incidentalmortality and a clear contrast can be drawn between this and the requirement ofavoidance of disturbance through tourism

The CMS is uneven in reach because selectivity is premised on endangermentAccordingly only those species that are critically placed receive the benefit ofAppendix I listing Prioritising species protection on endangerment is the foremostcontemporary approach160 however this poses risks for those species outside of thiscategory The intent of the CMS and related agreements is to ensure that species areprotected as they pass through other jurisdictions and to achieve a degree of consist-ency in the protective measures applied across the range Yet seeking this consist-ency between migratory species unwittingly creates inconsistencies with species thatdo not migrate

In principle through the action of the CMS and ACAP the black petrel is privi-leged in contrast to the other case study species As a result of ACAP the blackpetrel has been the subject of a species assessment161 which includes considerationof conservation status breeding biology conservation listings and plans populationtrends threats distribution and importantly key gaps in the species assessmentAccurate estimates of breeding population and distribution together with details offoraging range are highlighted as areas to augment understanding to enable betterprotection of the species The assessment provides a valuable focus on the species

159 Cooper and others (n 115) 1 3160 Alexander Gillespie lsquoAnimal Ethics and International Lawrsquo in Peter Sankoff and Steven White (eds)

Animal Law in Australasia A New Dialogue (Federation Press 2009) 352161 Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels lsquoACAP Species Assessment Black Petrel

Procellaria Parkinsoniirsquo (2009) lthttpwwwacapaqacap-speciesgt accessed 20 June 2015

512 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 25: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

particularly where a recovery plan pursuant to the Wildlife Act 1953 is not in placeas is the case of the black petrel

That aside the black petrel population has been decimated to such an extent thatit now only survives on two offshore islands and within very specific locations162

Why then would a restriction lsquoto prevent remove compensate for or minimize asappropriate the adverse effects of activities or obstacles that seriously impede orprevent the migration of the speciesrsquo163 not apply to that species To strengthen theeffect of the CMS it is recommended that Appendix 1 standards be extended to alllsquothreatened speciesrsquo Given that the standards already provide lsquoleewayrsquo for implement-ing nations (for instance lsquominimise as appropriatersquo) such a measure would not beunduly onerous

While the black petrel has the benefit of ACAP this agreement covers all albatrossbut does not cover all petrel164 or other migrating New Zealand species The sootyshearwater and the bar-tailed godwit are excluded from consideration despite threatassessments revealing significant potential for loss on migration routes The sootyshearwater may be a populous species but it suffers one of the highest rates ofbycatch in New Zealand fisheries165 The bar-tailed godwit within the New Zealandrange is not covered by binding flyways protection despite development activityoccurring along its migration routes particularly staging posts in the Yellow Sea of ascale which significantly threatens the species

On a side note the position of the wrybill deserves consideration The wrybill isnot contemplated by the CMS because it is an internal migrant so despite facingmany similar obstacles it cannot gain additional protection from this internationalsource While the wrybill enjoys the more general protection of the CBD it lacks theprotective focus regarding migration impediments and a species assessment made allthe more valuable in the absence of a recovery plan under the Wildlife Act 1953Effort needs to be applied to ensure domestic law adequately covers the threats facedby internal migrants and reflects if not strengthens measures available under CMSand ACAP

Although there are 119 Parties to the CMS membership is not universal andneither the Peoplersquos Republic of China nor the Republic of Korea is a member166

This is significant for the godwit given the extent of habitat loss arising throughreclamation and development at key staging posts in these countries

Similarly with ACAP only 45 of the Range States are party to the Agreementand eight of the Range States are not party to the CMS including the PeoplersquosRepublic of China the Russian Federation and the USA167 Coverage for the blackpetrel though is reasonable New Zealand (its only known breeding ground) is a

162 Francis and Bell (n 147) 4163 CMS art III (4) (b)164 CMS Scientific Council Flyways Working Group A Review of CMS and Non-CMS Existing

Administrative and Management Instruments for Migratory Birds Globally in A Review of Migratory BirdFlyways and Priorities for Management (CMS Techncial Series Publication No 27 2014) 46 lthttpwwwcmsintenworkinggroupworking-group-flywaysgt accessed 28 June 2015

165 Richard and Abraham (n 112) 18166 Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and its

Agreements lthttpwwwcmsintenlegalinstrumentcmsgt accessed 28 June 2015167 CMS Scientific Council Flyways (n 164) 50

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 513

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 26: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

Party as are Australia Equador and Peru which are known as foraging Range StatesThe bird is however also known to forage within the Exclusive Economic Zones ofColumbia El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Panama and the USA none of which areParties to ACAP168

This lack of universal membership of Range States creates an immediate problemas regards compliance and migratory species but a second issue is that of scale Theforaging range of the black petrel is extensive reaching west to Australia and east toSouth and Central America but also incorporates the vast tracts of ocean The char-acterisation of compliance with international agreements as lsquopaper compliancersquo incontrast to actual compliance is a further issue limiting treaty effectiveness169

6 C O N C L U S I O NRamsar the CBD the CMS and ACAP each canvass a range of important issues andrelated responses which impact on the case study species The Conventions are welldirected and propose and drive a wide range of important measures Despite thisevidence suggests that the instruments and their implementation are currently insuf-ficient to stem biodiversity loss There are three main points to conclude from thereview

First the examination shows that the agreements are focused upon the most sig-nificant threats that face the case study species but that the measures of themselvesare not particularly compelling A failure to adopt a strong active stance to precautionand prevention in the management of threats to species weakens the rigour of meas-ures applied Moreover considerable leeway is left for any implementing nation thusimpacting on the extent of burden distributed to species It can be argued that stron-ger obligations imposed at the international level may produce greater efforts at thenational level and that without leadership at the international level national effortsmay falter Yet this is only part of the problem as this article demonstrates that des-pite some significant effort on behalf of DOC and other administering agencies inmany instances the implementation effort of New Zealand is deficient This is bothin relation to specific obligations of agreements and more general intentSignificantly more could be made of Ramsar to benefit birds in New Zealandthrough greater engagement and implementation For species protection thecurrent threat posed to the black petrel through fisheries bycatch provides evidenceof ineffectual instruments and insufficient implementation methods

Active implementation of the Aichi targets would benefit all case study speciesThe Aichi targets and their translations represent a step up in boldness of approachbut if they are to resound effectively in the Anthropocene contracting nations mustapply strong implementing measures to secure the targets Endorsement by nation-states of the principle of non-regression170 is recommended to prevent slippage aproblem looming in relation to environmental protection in New Zealand as the

168 ACAP Species Assessment (n 161)169 Caddell (n 114) 143170 Michel Prieur lsquoNon-regression in Environmental Lawrsquo (2012) 52 SAPIENS [Online] lthttpsapi-

ensrevuesorg1405gt accessed 21 June 2015

514 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 27: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

government debates amendment to the guiding principles of the RMA171 Greaterefforts are required in order to give effect to the targets in a policy environmentdominated by notions of lsquowise usersquo and sustainable development For New Zealandachieving the Aichi targets will be dependent upon addressing the ways in which thelaw currently privileges resource use to the detriment of species due to insufficientenvironment standards sectoral defences widespread externalities and deficientimplementation Heightened protection through spatial zoning would benefit thecase study birds together with more nuanced spatial zoning in protective reservesand transition areas

Secondly the article illustrates an inconsistent and fragmented approach to threat-ened species An examination across the three instruments displays the unevennessof approach Ramsar is focused upon a specific ecosystem type and protecting thevalues within it but site selection and implementation produce an ad hoc approachto protecting the site values and the species for which the site provides habitatInsufficient management of external influences results in the persistence of a range ofthreats to the case study species and potentially the same can be said for insufficienton-site management

CMS and ACAP elevate standards of protection for particular species accordingto remit and premised upon endangerment While it is acknowledged that this is theintention and purpose of the agreement it nevertheless creates a separate and frag-mented layer of protection For the black petrel it is clearly vital that threats such asbycatch are addressed quickly and with priority and ACAP provides welcomesupport Yet just because the sooty shearwater is a numerous species does not seema sufficient reason for it to be excluded from Appendix II particularly where it is aspecies of significant cultural importance In the same vein the godwit and the blackpetrel arguably deserve protection from obstacles that prevent or hinder migrationand other related intentions yet this protection is reserved for international migrantspecies whose plight is critical The management of disturbance is another examplewhich receives uneven treatment

Due to its lack of immediate endangerment the godwit found on New Zealandshores misses out on a protective agreement despite being a migrant sufferingconsiderable loss at its international staging posts Of concern are the scale of thisloss and the potential agility of an international agreement to respond to this Inaddition lack of universal membership of both ACAP and CMS limits reach andconsistency of approach

Thirdly there is a lack of integration across the agreements a problem accentu-ated by fragmentation in national approach If not coordinated and consistent at aninternational level it is much less likely that an integrated approach will be taken at anational level Although measures are in place to increase harmonisation the ad hocdevelopment of treaties related institutional frameworks and extensive guidancematerial underscore the need for implementing nations to introduce universal andintegrated approaches to protecting threatened species otherwise certain species mayslip between the cracks of protection

171 Ministry for the Environment Improving our Resource Management System A Discussion Document(Ministry for the Environment 2013) 34

The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements 515

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171
Page 28: The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements ...The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements: A New Zealand Case Study Pip Wallace* ABSTRACT Despite proliferation

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

My grateful thanks to Al Gillespie Barry Barton Robyn Longhurst Ben BoerNicola Wheen and Iain White for valuable comments on earlier drafts and to the an-onymous reviewers for this journal Their well-directed comments combined withLiz Fisherrsquos meticulous editing skills have greatly improved this research

516 The Reduced Effect of International Conservation Agreements

at University of W

aikato Library on D

ecember 3 2015

httpjeloxfordjournalsorgD

ownloaded from

  • eqv022-COR1
  • eqv022-FN1
  • eqv022-FN2
  • eqv022-FN3
  • eqv022-FN4
  • eqv022-FN5
  • eqv022-FN6
  • eqv022-FN7
  • eqv022-FN8
  • eqv022-FN9
  • eqv022-FN10
  • eqv022-FN11
  • eqv022-FN12
  • eqv022-FN13
  • eqv022-FN14
  • eqv022-FN15
  • eqv022-FN16
  • eqv022-FN17
  • eqv022-FN18
  • eqv022-FN19
  • eqv022-FN20
  • eqv022-FN21
  • eqv022-FN22
  • eqv022-FN23
  • eqv022-FN24
  • eqv022-FN25
  • eqv022-FN26
  • eqv022-FN27
  • eqv022-FN28
  • eqv022-FN29
  • eqv022-FN30
  • eqv022-FN31
  • eqv022-FN32
  • eqv022-FN33
  • eqv022-FN34
  • eqv022-FN35
  • eqv022-FN36
  • eqv022-FN37
  • eqv022-FN38
  • eqv022-FN39
  • eqv022-FN40
  • eqv022-FN41
  • eqv022-FN42
  • eqv022-FN43
  • eqv022-FN44
  • eqv022-FN45
  • eqv022-FN46
  • eqv022-FN47
  • eqv022-FN48
  • eqv022-FN49
  • eqv022-FN50
  • eqv022-FN51
  • eqv022-FN52
  • eqv022-FN53
  • eqv022-FN54
  • eqv022-FN55
  • eqv022-FN56
  • eqv022-FN57
  • eqv022-FN58
  • eqv022-FN59
  • eqv022-FN60
  • eqv022-FN61
  • eqv022-FN62
  • eqv022-FN63
  • eqv022-FN64
  • eqv022-FN65
  • eqv022-FN66
  • eqv022-FN67
  • eqv022-FN68
  • eqv022-FN69
  • eqv022-FN70
  • eqv022-FN71
  • eqv022-FN72
  • eqv022-FN73
  • eqv022-FN74
  • eqv022-FN75
  • eqv022-FN76
  • eqv022-FN77
  • eqv022-FN78
  • eqv022-FN79
  • eqv022-FN80
  • eqv022-FN81
  • eqv022-FN82
  • eqv022-FN83
  • eqv022-FN84
  • eqv022-FN85
  • eqv022-FN86
  • eqv022-FN87
  • eqv022-FN88
  • eqv022-FN89
  • eqv022-FN90
  • eqv022-FN91
  • eqv022-FN92
  • eqv022-FN93
  • eqv022-FN94
  • eqv022-FN95
  • eqv022-FN96
  • eqv022-FN97
  • eqv022-FN98
  • eqv022-FN99
  • eqv022-FN100
  • eqv022-FN101
  • eqv022-FN102
  • eqv022-FN103
  • eqv022-FN104
  • eqv022-FN105
  • eqv022-FN106
  • eqv022-FN107
  • eqv022-FN108
  • eqv022-FN109
  • eqv022-FN110
  • eqv022-FN111
  • eqv022-FN112
  • eqv022-FN113
  • eqv022-FN114
  • eqv022-FN115
  • eqv022-FN116
  • eqv022-FN117
  • eqv022-FN118
  • eqv022-FN119
  • eqv022-FN120
  • eqv022-FN121
  • eqv022-FN122
  • eqv022-FN123
  • eqv022-FN124
  • eqv022-FN125
  • eqv022-FN126
  • eqv022-FN127
  • eqv022-FN128
  • eqv022-FN129
  • eqv022-FN130
  • eqv022-FN131
  • eqv022-FN132
  • eqv022-FN133
  • eqv022-FN134
  • eqv022-FN135
  • eqv022-FN136
  • eqv022-FN137
  • eqv022-FN138
  • eqv022-FN139
  • eqv022-FN140
  • eqv022-FN141
  • eqv022-FN142
  • eqv022-FN143
  • eqv022-FN144
  • eqv022-FN145
  • eqv022-FN146
  • eqv022-FN147
  • eqv022-FN148
  • eqv022-FN149
  • eqv022-FN150
  • eqv022-FN151
  • eqv022-FN152
  • eqv022-FN153
  • eqv022-FN154
  • eqv022-FN155
  • eqv022-FN156
  • eqv022-FN157
  • eqv022-FN158
  • eqv022-FN159
  • eqv022-FN160
  • eqv022-FN161
  • eqv022-FN162
  • eqv022-FN163
  • eqv022-FN164
  • eqv022-FN165
  • eqv022-FN166
  • eqv022-FN167
  • eqv022-FN168
  • eqv022-FN169
  • eqv022-FN170
  • eqv022-FN171