KEY POINTS:
Last week's rejection of the Department of Conservation's application for a huge marine reserve at Great Barrier Island (Aotea) by the Fisheries Minister highlights many significant issues.
First, the importance of the Crown's obligations to honour the Treaty of Waitangi and the 1992 Settlement Deed and how these can have benefits for all New Zealanders.
And while many grumble about the rights that tangata whenua seem to have as compared to other Kiwis, these statutory rights were underlined by Jim Anderton's decision.
Mr Anderton acknowledged the impact a 495sq km reserve would have on Ngati Rehua and their ability to manage areas of significance to them. He also recognised the effect of the proposed reserve on the local economy, lifestyle and the associated value to commercial, customary and amateur fishers.
The outcome is that the island community can continue to exercise their common law right to fish and the wider public can continue to enjoy the marine environment of the outer Hauraki Gulf.
The northeastern coast of Aotea has been a favourite destination for generations of Kiwis, both for fishing and recreation. It has also supported many commercial fishing families for an equal period of time.
Secondly, the decision notes the balancing exercise required when considering appropriate marine protection for remote areas.
It was inconceivable that islanders who do not have access to or the facility to fish for themselves would be constrained to eating frozen hoki fillets from the island's store.
A marine reserve of this magnitude would also have excluded from management the very community that DoC would have relied on to police such a large area.
A far more inclusive approach to marine protection, which has the support of tangata whenua and the local community, has far more potential than having bureaucrats promoting a lock-it-up-attitude in our marine environment.
Since legislative change in the early 90s the only tools available to local communities wanting to sustainably manage their coastal waters and fisheries are those encompassed within the 1992 settlement. Unfortunately a lack of communication and public understanding of the empowering nature of mataitai, taiapure and rahui has often led to a negative, knee-jerk reaction from the public.
[Mataitai: Reserves created in areas of traditional importance to Maori for customary food gathering. Taiapure: local fisheries recognising the special significance of an area to local iwi or hapu. Rahui: a form of tapu restricting access to or use of an area.]
This fear-factor response is compounded when DoC is the applicant, reviewer and adjudicator of marine reserve proposals, as in the case of the Barrier application.
Since the advent of the Barrier reserve proposal in 2003, many non-commercial fishing interest groups have emphasised DoC's poor process, its lack of public consultation and the need for a more co-ordinated approach to marine protection.
Whether the much-heralded Marine Protected Areas Policy delivers more positive results remains to be seen. If the Fisheries Minister is involved in the process there will be hope for all fishing interest groups.
One thing is certain. The distress caused over the past five years by DoC's marine reserve process will not easily be forgotten. An injustice has been done to Ngati Rehua, other islanders and the wider community who value Great Barrier Island.
A necessary step to make progress on future marine protection for Aotea will require a public apology from the DoC. Nothing less will suffice.
* Trish Rea is an advocate for non-commercial fishing interests, works with a number of Maori and amateur fishing organisations and has been involved in the Barrier reserve debate since 2003.
