So Nick Smith, our conservation Minister, has just announced 435,000 hectares of marine reserves around the subantarctic islands. Hooray, great news, you may think, but don't be fooled. Straight away I've seen/heard people talking about how this is so great. Yes, it is, but beware: by passing on the "good news" you are also playing your part in the government's spin machine.
They had a hell of a trip down: the navy boat HMNZS Wellington, with the Minister, DOC staff, navy kids, Sam and Gareth Morgan, and Metservice people was forced to turn back from a storm described as 'hell on earth'... 16 metre waves and gusts up to 90 knots (166kph)...eek! Even allowing for the usual nautical exaggeration that would be really, really full on. There's a reason there's an old saying - Below 40 degrees south there is no law. Below 50 degrees there is no god. The captain said it was the worst sea he'd ever sailed in and admitted to having been afraid.
To give you an idea, this is about a 3 or 4 metre swell from the high aft deck of the 45m Spirit of NZ:
Multiply that by 4... Eek! So I was curious, why is the Minister braving these (not unusual for that patch of ocean) conditions? I'd heard rumours about setting up a climate monitoring station (great, let's spend money on better instruments to watch humans change the climate rather than on stopping changing the climate) and that may well still be a thing.
But this announcement about the marine reserves makes the trip make more sense. This government has come under increasing criticism for its 'drill it, mine it, frack it' ideology, inaction on climate change, and general mood of not giving a fuck about the natural world we depend upon. People's dissatisfaction is showing with, among other things, the growing momentum of the oil free movement. But now along comes election year, and the blokes in charge are a bit worried about their image, and someone has had the genius idea that we can announce vast tracts of distant ocean as marine reserve and look really, really, ridiculously environmentally caring.
I have no problem with making marine reserves in the subantarctics. But before you celebrate, consider how much impact these reserves are really going to have. Are any existing activities drastically going to change down there? And what else is going on that might endanger these places?
I sailed to Campbell Island last year and Nick Smith is right in saying that this place, along with the Auckland and Bounty Islands, is "one of the most pristine places on earth". It is one of the most amazing and precious places I have ever been lucky enough to visit. I sailed there on Tiama to pick up 6 scientists and bring them back to Bluff - our steel hulled sailboat is the prime mode of transport for scientists working on the subantartic islands. We happened to be anchored in harbour for one glorious day and I had a chance to explore part of the island, meeting sealions, albatross chicks like giant fluffy skittles, giant megaherb plants, and so many more wonders.
So many sealions swimming around the boat like pasta on the boil, and lolloping around on land like big dog-slugs. A little bit scary when they run at you...
Nick Smith goes on to say that "these marine reserves are about keeping them that way"(ie pristine). "The marine reserve status that takes effect today means there can be no fishing, no mining, no petroleum exploration and no marine farming in these waters." That sounds great. But check out Campbell Island. This is one of the approx 3 buildings on the island, in a place where everything is carry in, carry out, you need to vacuum your bags before going ashore to check for seeds, and the animals are completely unafraid of humans because they've hardly ever seen any.
A built-up area on campbell island. #densitydonewell.The activities mentioned by Nick Smith - fishing, mining, marine farming etc aren't happening here, at all, and no-one has anything like that planned. So it seems to me making the reserves is a nice idea, but it's not a heroic act of change - in fact it will have approximately zero impact.
But what WILL have a huge and drastic effect on these islands is the very programme of fossil fuel exploration that this announcement seems designed to distract us from. At the same time as the gvmt is ostensibly protecting these precious islands, Energy Minister Simon Bridges is travelling around the world trying to schmooze foreign oil companies to come and drill right next to these same islands, in the super deep, super rough waters of the great south basin.
Does someone need to sit these ministers down together and let them know that water moves around? Do you think being tossed by 16 metre waves might have given Nick Smith the sense that this patch of water in particular, moves around quite a lot? It is crazy to talk about protecting these islands while subsidising the fossil fuel industry in NZ by $46 million a year (WWF report 2013, link below) and actively encouraging them to stick drills into the seabed's belly within spill range of these islands.
We don't have the equipment to deal with a spill a few miles from the complacent waters of Tauranga - we certainly can't handle one here. If Nick Smith was genuine about protecting these pristine islands, he would take a strong stand against deep sea oil, which threatens both the islands directly through the danger of spills, and us all through the challenge of our climate crisis. Beware you're not inadvertantly helping with this sugar coated PR game.
some links:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11212495 (marine reserves article)
http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/9760669/Hell-storm-sends-Kiwi-expedition-packing
http://www.wwf.org.nz/?10762/New-report-exposes-Government-hypocrisy-on-fossil-fuel-subsidies
learn more about the subantarctics -
http://www.ourfarsouth.org/
