I am sure you can sit down with dedicated and well intentioned Komatua to discuss how they would like to manage their local fish stocks. I haven't myself, but I know others who have. That doesn't mean that they will do it better than a properly designed scientific model that hasn't been politically hijacked. Their background in fisheries management isn't with a 5 million population. What you would really be relying on is the political clout of Maori to achieve fisheries controls that the government could implement tomorrow if they weren't so 'captured' by the commercial sector. That to me is just plain dumb and we should focus more on sorting out our political system instead.

My personal experience has been to be told that I am 'unwelcome' in an area that the local Maori felt they 'owned' and to be threatened with assault by a Ngati Whatua who told me that they 'owned the sea' when I suggested that he slowed down and stopped putting other boats at danger by speeding through the marina.  You can't ignore that whilst one part of Maori politics may be well intentioned, others may not be the same.  Who knows which side will hold the political power over any fisheries management in the future. The ones that are good are often very good, but the ones that are bad.....

As I have already said, I believe in letting small coastal Maori communities have a bit more say in how their local area is managed, and those with real history in an area to have some additional rights to feed themselves in a traditional way.  The trouble with SeaChange etc is that it tries to go way beyond that. My families history in the Hauraki Gulf goes back nearly 100 years and in the Northland fisheries probably predates the Treaty. I have been fishing both personally for over 50 years. So unless some person has a much better and consistent history in the fishery why am I going to give over control to them unless I truly believe that it will produce long term good and not just end up as another political hijack?