Questionnaire best way to gauge feelings on reserve

Comment by IAIN McAULEY*

Ten years ago I conducted an in-depth review of several marine reserves as part of my masters degree in geography.

I focused, in particular, on the consultation processes the Department of Conservation employed to establish the reserves.

I talked to a wide range of interest groups, including recreational fishers and several departmental employees. I found the most common points of contention were the loss of fishing rights for the local communities and the nature of DoC's consultation.

Further investigation, notably at the marine reserve at Hahei, revealed that the extent of the opposition from local fishers was usually confined to a narrow but vocal minority and that, in fact, communities were increasingly supportive in the areas where reserves had become established.

My research also found that many in the community believed DoC had a pre-determined agenda when it came to consultation over marine reserves. This was usually compounded as soon as any proposed boundaries were announced.

I feel a sense of disappointment, then, and a bit of deja vu, when I see reports that use words such as "high-handed" and "fait accompli" to describe the department's consultation over the proposed marine reserve off Great Barrier Island.

Likewise, recreational fishers are referred to as "greedy" and "selfish" because they are defending what they see as a legitimate, nay, God-given, right to plunder.

These rights have recently found a champion in Herald writer Peter Jessup, who seeks regularly to muster opposition to conservation proposals.

So has DoC learned nothing in the past decade? First, it should be noted that no formal reserve proposal has yet been made for Great Barrier. Any suggested boundaries that might be circulating are merely the desired ecological boundaries.

In a perfect world, all marine reserves would be based on ecological principles but, in reality, the final boundaries are usually much smaller following negotiations between the proponent and the extractive user groups - that is, the fishers.

This was certainly the case at Hahei, where the recreational fishers dropped their opposition only when several areas were excluded from the final reserve.

The second point is that DoC's regional conservator is quite correct when he states that most submissions support a proposed reserve. However, it seems clear the local community is not quite as supportive. Again I felt a sense of deja vu because this almost exactly mirrors Hahei.

There, the most affected communities, at Hahei and Cooks Beach, felt national interests were overwhelming them and they were getting little say in the matter.

The challenge, then, is for DoC to further engage the Great Barrier community and convince it to support a reserve.

As at Hahei and many other of the marine reserves already established, local communities can come to accept marine reserves and recognise the need to preserve special habitats for future generations to enjoy.

Great Barrier is a unique place with a colourful community. I would be very surprised if that community were diametrically opposed to marine reserves. It just wants to be heard.

I am sure that the Great Barrier community will be open to compromise, but this is unlikely to happen during public meetings. These tend to be adversarial and can be dominated by extremists.

DoC should send questionnaires to all ratepayers on the island, backed up with face-to-face interviews if necessary.

These measures were successfully employed at Goat Island and at Hahei. There is no good reason why they cannot work on Great Barrier.

* Iain McAuley is a tutor in geography and planning at Auckland University.