OPINION: The article To cull protected fur seals or to consign muttonbirding to history? published by Stuff was not only misleading but misinformed.

The author states that "Conservation is about more than protecting wildlife, it is about playing our role in managing entire ecosystems."

The ecosystem in question is in no need of management; all is as it should be from an ecological point of view. The 'need' for managing this particular ecosystem seems to be derived purely from a people's perspective.

OXANA REPINA/SUPPLIED A New Zealand fur seal basks on a rocky beach.

Muttonbird harvesting

Māori have harvested shearwaters/tītī since early times. The collecting of shearwater chicks is one of the few remaining large-scale harvests of any seabird species in the world, and is commonly referred to as muttonbirding.

READ MORE:

* Once there were muttonbirds

* Muttonbird islands 'essential' to Maori life

* To kill a muttonbird

For Rakiura Māori muttonbirding is a customary right, which involves harvesting sooty shearwaters on 36 islands off Stewart Island, known as the Tītī Islands. Eighteen of these islands are referred to as the Beneficial Islands, with only certain families being able to harvest from them. Each year the harvesting season runs for two months, from April 1 to May 31.

Harvesting practices have a strong cultural legacy, with traditional muttonbirding having taken place over generations throughout Māori history. While this ancestral practice is woven into the fabric of many Rakiura families, the harvest intensity and lack of a catch quota is being questioned by many New Zealanders, in regards to sustainability.

It appears that muttonbirding is no longer simply a way of life based on traditional customs. There is also very much a focus on income generation. The balance seems to have shifted from recreational to commercial harvesters, with cultural significance blurring into economic significance. Muttonbirds are considered an item of economic value, which can be purchased by the bucket load (20-21 birds) from Ngāi Tahu Foods for $300.

Sooty shearwater threats

The sooty shearwater, despite being one of the more common seabirds sighted in New Zealand waters, is actually listed as being in decline.

Introduced mammals, particularly feral cats, rats, mustelids, and feral pigs have long extirpated most sooty shearwater breeding colonies from the New Zealand mainland. Large breeding populations are now restricted to predator-free offshore islands only. The paradox is that these islands are not safe havens at all, with the level of annual harvesting.

The sooty shearwater is also one of the seabird species most frequently killed by New Zealand fisheries, with longliners and trawlers responsible for the majority of mortalities.

Fur seal threats

While fur seals have been recolonising the New Zealand mainland and Stewart Island since nearly being driven to extinction, the population is still nowhere near its former abundance, with some breeding colonies currently experiencing declines.

Today's fur seal population of 200,000 is still relatively meagre compared to a past population of two million. This means fur seals are still very much on the road to recovery, which has been enabled by protection under the Marine Mammal Act 1978.

Although fur seals are no longer on the brink of extinction, they continue to face numerous human induced threats. Fur seals are incidentally captured and subsequently drowned during trawling and long line fishing operations. Other human impacts on seals include overfishing/food competition, marine debris entanglement, tourism, harassment, dog attacks, and oil/gas exploration.

Species coexistence

Burrow nesting seabirds and seals have always coexisted, not just in New Zealand, but globally. These marine species evolved together in the same habitats.

Furthermore, there isn't a legitimate issue in regards to fur seals now being 'too abundant' and 'detrimentally affecting' sooty shearwater reproductive success.

When fur seals were at the height of their abundance (prior to human arrival and sealing), sooty shearwater colonies prevailed and did not decline. Their breeding output remained stable, despite far more seals being around then, than there are today.

The basis of the proposed seal cull is therefore inaccurate.

The issues at play

The core issues centre around what Rakiura people 'want' going forward. The basis of the suggested seal cull is about ultimately preserving the muttonbirding heritage and ease of access, rather than serious conservation concerns for the sooty shearwater in regards to increasing seal numbers.

In essence, the intention is to stop fur seals hauling out at sooty shearwater colonies in order to simplify harvesting activities. This directly relates to Rakiura Māori not wanting to 'compete' with fur seals in terms of land use and their livelihood. They seek access to harvesting locations without concerns about avoiding seals, which may (quite rightly so) be aggressive towards human disturbance in their habitat.

Fur seals have called these islands home for eons, long before Māori or European settlers set foot in New Zealand. So who's actually competing with who?

The proposed cull

Rakiura Māori are pushing for a targeted cull or management solution to keep fur seals off the Tītī Islands. The actual reasoning behind this request is likely largely based on the fact that fur seals are deemed a nuisance in relation to muttonbird harvesting.

Being an island nation, we have always had to share the coastline with marine mammals. Why would this change simply for ease of harvesting a 'resource'?

Moreover, why should New Zealanders stand by a seal cull that 'benefits' a fraction of the population (around 500 people to be exact), for unsound reasons? It has been illegal to cull fur seals for decades, why should this change now?

The fact that the Department of Conservation is considering such a request, is preposterous. One cannot enforce a specific act, then bend the legislation sideways, breaching various statutes, to appease a few. If a government department authorises such a misguided 'management' practice, then on what basis will it be possible to decline future culling requests from other parties?

A sustainable future

The sooty shearwater doesn't belong to a single country or race, they are world travellers breeding in multiple countries (New Zealand, Australia, Chile, and the Falklands). They also migrate throughout the North Pacific to forage off Russia, Japan, Alaska, and California. No single country can stake a claim on this species, to the detriment of others who treasure this unique seabird and do not cause it harm.

Where is the logic in culling one species, in order to cull another? The focal point is on satisfying human 'needs', whilst disregarding a protected species and bypassing legislation.

A seal cull going ahead would result in huge international backlash for New Zealand, a country that hails itself as having a 'clean green' image, being a biodiversity hotspot and an exemplary leader in conservation. The implications would be resoundingly appalling. No matter how you look at it, the suggestion of a cull is a no-go.

Sabrina Luecht is a wildlife biologist, and is specialised in endangered avian species. She has worked for many conservation organisations.