Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT ENV-2016-AKL- 42 and 45
IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA)
AND
IN THE MATTER of two appeals under s 120 of the RMA
BETWEEN NGA POTIKI A TAMAPAHORE TRUST AND
OTHERS
Appellants
AND BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL
Respondent
AND ASTROLABE COMMUNITY TRUST
Applicant
PRIMARY STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF MARIA BRENDA HORNE FOR TE RŪNANGA O NGĀTI WHAKAUE KI MAKETŪ AND
TE ARAWA TAKITAI MOANA KAUMATA FORUM
Dated: 3rd January 2017
Page | 2
INTRODUCTION
1. My name is Maria Brenda Horne.
2. I am the manager for Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Incorporated
Society (Rūnanga).
3. I whakapapa to Ngāti Whakaue, Ngāti Whakahemo, Ngāti Awa and other Te
Arawa coastal hapū.
4. My mother Ngawaka Theresa Tapsell hails from Maketū and Ngāti Whakaue
/ Ngāti Pikiao. Her father was Whenuariri Tapihana and her mother was Te
Rohu Waata (Walters). They owned lands on Arawa Avenue, Little Waihi
Road, Kiokio and Whenuariri Roads located in Maketū.
5. Their children are kith and kin to the descendants of the Tapsell, Walters,
Gourlays, Rollestons, Potaka, Corbetts and other strands of the Ngāti
Whakaue ki Maketū hapū.
6. My father Taekata Tokoihi Horne hails from Pukehina and is of Ngāti
Whakahemo / Ngāti Awa descent. His great grandmother was Ihipera
Takurua of the Ngāti Tunohopu hapū which is a sub tribe of Ngāti Whakaue.
She lived in Maketū and her lands were located on Church Road, Maketū.
Pepeha o Ngāti Whakaue ki Tai (Maketū)
Ko Tongariro te Maunga,
Ko Kaituna te Awa,
Ko Te Awa o Ngatoroirangi te Moana,
Ko Maketū te Papa Tapu,
Ko Tāpati te Marae,
Ko Whakaue Kaipapa, Ko Rangiuru ngā Whare Tūpuna,
Ko Whakaue Kaipapa te Tangata,
Ko Ngāti Whakaue te Iwi.
7. Through whakapapa, conquest, kith, and kinship, Ngāti Whakaue are tied to
this land, Maketū. They can trace their lineage to Tamatekapua the
Kaihautu (captain) of Te Arawa waka. The Lower Kaituna Catchment and
Page | 3
the Maketū Estuary have sustained the people for many generations. The
Ngāti Whakaue marae, Tāpati, is located on the shores of the Maketū
Estuary.
8. In 2012, I became a certified resource consent hearings commissioner after
passing the Making Good Decisions course. I also sit as a commissioner on
the Western Bay of Plenty Liquor Licensing Authority.
9. I have a degree in International Communication and a Post Graduate
Diploma in Business Studies.
10. I was elected by the hapū to Komiti Nui o Ngāti Whakaue, who are the
trustees progressing Ngāti Whakaue Treaty Claims with the Crown.
11. I was elected by the hapū to the Te Arawa Partnership Forum under
Western Bay of Plenty District Council.
12. I am appointed to Bledisloe Park Committee by the Western Bay of Plenty
Council as the Maketū Representative.
13. I am an observer representative on Te Maru o Kaituna River Authority, as a
Ngāti Whakaue representative, which is a Legislative Statutory Body that
promotes the restoration, protection and enhancement of the environmental,
cultural, and spiritual health well-being of the Kaituna River.
THE RŪNANGA
14. The word ‘rūnanga’ can be translated as meaning a traditional Māori
assembly or tribal gathering, or the governing council or administrative group
of a Māori hapū or iwi.
15. The Rūnanga was formed by tangata whenua in Maketū in 2002. The
objective was to form an Iwi Authority that could represent the Ngāti
Whakaue ki Maketū hapū in political and iwi matters. We are recognised by
other Iwi Authorities, councils and Maketū community groups. We have two
mandated kaumatua/kuia that serve on the Rūnanga together with the
Rūnanga board members. We consistently maintain our membership
database of active members.
Page | 4
16. Tauranga City Council (TCC) and the Rūnanga have had a protocol
agreement in place since 2008. We have a representative position on the
tangata whenua collective and combined tangata whenua forum. The
protocol agreement ensures that TCC keeps us informed of, and involved in,
issues that affect the Rūnanga. For example, the protocol ensured, in
respect of the Te Tumu Pa Site identified in the TCC district plan, that the
cultural monitoring was carried out by Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Hapū. We
are consulted on a regular basis in respect of resource consent applications
within our tribal boundaries.
17. The Rūnanga lodged an Iwi Resource Management Plan Phase 2 with the
Bay of Plenty Regional Council in 2011 (see further discussion under
paragraph [23] of this statement). We are recognised in Maketū as a
tangata whenua group. We review consents within our hapū tribal
boundaries. This year we will be reviewing the Iwi Resource Management
Plan to include the marine environment. We support the Kaituna River /
Ongatoro Maketū Estuary Project. This project addresses a long-time
grievance of Ngāti Whakaue to return the river to the Maketū Estuary.
18. The Rūnanga is also recognised by the Western Bay of Plenty District
Council (WBOPDC). We sit on working committees to write protocols such
as the cultural monitoring protocol. Our representative is part of a working
group tasked with writing ‘Te Ara’, a strategic plan for the tangata whenua
partnership forums. We have been part of the WBOPDC Māori Forum on
council since 2003. We have worked with this Council on the Healthy
Whare Project in Maketū and the wider rural areas of Pukehina, Pongakawa
and Otamarakau. This project was presented to the Minister for Māori
Development recently and the team are regular presenters to community
groups.
19. The Rūnanga submitted a Treaty of Waitangi claim for past historical
grievances against the Crown in 2008 for and on behalf of the Hapū. This
action aligns with the Iwi Authority Charter. I am on the mandated body
which is Komiti Nui o Ngāti Whakaue which has been delegated to address
the Treaty Claims and grievances of Ngāti Whakaue
Page | 5
NGĀTI WHAKAUE BOUNDARIES/ROHE
20. The immediate tribal boundaries of Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū are from Te
Tumu to Waihi Estuary, Maketū.
21. We re-occupied Maketū at the beginning of the flax trading era around 1829.
22. We define our tribal boundaries by ahikā - the long occupation of the coastal
area and the stories, the whakapapa and the generations of descendants
that remain within Maketū and continue to occupy Maketū.
23. Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Iwi Resource Management Plan was first lodged
in 2008 and reviewed in 2011. The boundaries are unchanged within this
plan. A Hapū/Iwi Resource Management Plan (HIMP) is a document
developed and approved by hapū and/or iwi. HIMPs describe resource
management issues of importance to Māori as tangata whenua. A HIMP
may also contain information relating to specific cultural values, historical
accounts, descriptions of areas of interest (hapū/iwi boundaries/rohe) and
consultation/engagement protocols for resource consents and/or plan
changes.1
RANGITIRATANGA
24. My hapū is Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū. We have lived in Maketū
permanently since 1829. Our hapū returned to Maketū because a trader for
muskets wanted to set up a trading post in Maketū. His name was Hans
Felk Tapsell.
25. The original intention was to trade dressed flax for muskets. However, it
soon became apparent that Ngāti Whakaue could also purchase blankets,
shovels, spades, clothing, livestock, tobacco, alcohol and other things in
return for dressed flax.
26. Ngāti Whakaue chiefs Tohi Te Ururangi, Te Haupapa, Te Amohau,
Ngahuru, Haerehuka and others were all chiefs that settled in Maketū at
some stage during the flax trading era.
1 Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Hapu Resource Management Plans page,
www.boprc.govt.nz cited 31 December 2016.
Page | 6
27. Maketū became the port where ships were loaded with dressed flax and
products for the markets in Auckland and Sydney.
28. When the flax trading era ceased, the descendants of those early chiefs for
Ngāti Whakaue remained at Maketū and still live in Maketū today.
RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER TRIBES
29. Ngāti Whakaue have been represented on the WBOPDC Māori Forum for
many years. This turned into the Arawa Partnership in 2014.
30. Ngāti Whakaue have been represented on the TCC Tangata Whenua
Collective since 2009.
31. We were represented on the Tauranga Eastern Link Tangata Whenua
Advisory Group from the planning phases of the eastern link which
commenced in 2008. Ngāti Pukenga, Ngāiterangi, Ngā Potiki, Tapuika,
Waitaha and Ngāti Whakaue collaborated with the New Zealand Transport
Agency and Beca (environmental consultants) for a number of years to see
the motorway to fruition.
32. We are representatives on the Waiari Stream advisory group with the TCC.
We joined with Tapuika and Waitaha in challenging the water take around
2010.
33. The Rūnanga supported the Regional Council in the Environment Court to
oppose the appeal by Ngāti Makino Heritage Trust (NMHT) and Pikiao ki Tai
against the Kaituna River / Ongatoro Maketū Estuary Project. Those that
supported the Regional Council included Ngāti Rangiwewehi, Tapuika and
Waitaha.
34. Te Arawa Takitai Moana Kaumatua Forum (Kaumatua Forum) was born
from the mediation hui for the Kaituna River / Ongatoro Maketū Estuary
project in 2015. The cultural matters were taken back to the kaumatua of
the coast. Those that take part in the Kaumatua Forum live on the coast
and include kaumatua who whakapapa to Ngāti Makino, Ngāti Whakahemo,
Ngāti Whakaue, Ngāti Pikiao, Tuhourangi, Tapuika and Waitaha.
Page | 7
35. During the time of the MV Rena resource consent hearings, I extended the
invitation to Rangi Butler of Ngāi Te Hapū, Motiti to have the hearing at
Whakaue Kaipapa so that Motiti whanau could see their island Motiti and
because her whakapapa is to the Ngawhika whanau who are land owners at
Te Awhe Marae, which has been closed for a number of decades.
TIKANGA ON THE MOANA
36. Say a karakia when venturing out to the moana.
37. My sport is wakaama (outrigger canoeing) which I have been doing for
around 20 years. My position is steerer which involves navigating the waka
and being responsible for the crew. I paddle long distance races (30km) in
the ocean and seas both within New Zealand and other countries. I
understand the tikanga (customs) of the sea: the tides, the currents, the
reefs and rocks, the aquatic plants and the landscapes. These are all
important to take note of when paddling. Have respect for the environment.
Just like a fisherman or a diver I know the conditions of when the water is
good and not so good.
38. There are common signs of when a rock or reef may be in your path; the
tide, the features or behaviour of the water, such as a change in the patterns
of the waves, the whirlpool effects, a bigger rock may have waves breaking
on the surface. There may be a build-up of kelp or vegetation indicating a
rock is just below the surface. Rocks are good for divers to find kuku
(mussels) or paua, but not for waka (canoes) lest you hit it and crack your
hull. You would steer wide of underwater rocks and reefs that are revealed
in shallow waters.
39. The MV Rena grounded in good conditions. I understand that the captain
took a short cut to beat another boat into the Port of Tauranga.
40. Shortcuts are a risk where mistakes can happen, they don’t always pay off.
41. The reaction time of the crew was too slow, too late, to stop the hull of the
MV Rena from hitting the Astrolabe Reef (Otāiti). This may have come
about because not everyone knew what course was being taken so they did
not expect to be on Otāiti.
Page | 8
42. I agree that the captain and navigation officer of container ship Rena who
were each jailed for seven months have been punished.2 However, while
the Owner (Daina Shipping Company) has publicly apologised for the wreck,
I do not think it has ever really accepted its role in the grounding of the
Rena. The Transport Accident Investigation Commission headed by John
Marshall, QC, found the crew’s poor working environment was a major
contributing factor to the grounding.3
43. Two crew members operating a vessel in poor working conditions went to
jail. And the wealthy Owner presents itself as a responsible operator, while
hiring teams of consultants to justify its plans to save money by leaving the
wreck on a place of significant cultural and spiritual value to Māori. The
Owner’s quantification of everything concerning Rena in its own financial
terms is an insult to Māori and a violation of our tikanga.
44. This has not made it easy for those of us who are left with the debris and a
wreck in our coastal marine area. We are the victims, and we are still
feeling the effects of the wreck and its debris.
45. When my whanau dives then we share the catch with aunties and uncles
who can no longer go for themselves. We only take enough kai to feed
ourselves, and leave the rest for future days. This is manaakitanga (to care)
towards our whanaunga (relatives) in Maketū and the marine environment.
2 Morton, Jamie (25 May 2012). “Rena captain jailed for 7 months”, New Zealand Herald
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/europe/news/headlines.cfm?l_id=7. Cited 31 December 2016. 3 Smallman, Elton (19 December 2014). “Rena crew ignored safety protocols”, The Dominion
Post, www.pressreader.com/new-zealand/the-dominion-post/20141219/281547994239045; and “Damning report into Rena grounding”, Stuff, http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/64285413/ damning-report-into-rena-grounding. Both articles cited 1 January 2016. “Chief commissioner John Marshall, QC, presented the findings along with chief investigator Captain Tim Burfoot and Rena investigator Rob Thompson … Burfoot said several acts contributed to the grounding but the crew’s working environment had a major effect. ‘‘You need to understand the environment this crew were working in,’’ he said. ‘‘That goes to the wider standards of training they received, the ongoing experience they accumulated over the years and lastly, the environment on board and the culture of the company.’’
Page | 9
TAONGA WHAKAHIRAHIRA
46. Te Awa o Ngatoroirangi (Maketū estuary), the lower Kaituna River, the Waihi
Estuary and the coastal marine area are all important taonga. It is what
makes Ngāti Whakaue rich; we maintain our authenticity by being able to
carry out traditional practices in a manner that promotes, preserves and
protects kaitiakitanga.
47. The Kaituna River was diverted away in 1957 from the Maketū Estuary. The
Maketū Action Group, Maketū Community Group for the Environment, kuia /
koroua of Maketū and the Rūnanga over the years have all challenged
county councils, river boards, and territorial authorities to redivert the
Kaituna River back to the Maketū Estuary.
48. The pipi, kina and kuku is gathered around Maketū. The Maketū kuku
(mussels) is a prized delicacy all over the motu (island). Those people who
have tasted Maketū kuku will remember the food with nothing but fond
memories of the taste, the flavour and the size of the kuku.
TRADITIONAL FISHING GROUNDS
49. Te Arawa waka boundaries are from Wairakei to Otamarakau. The
traditional fishing grounds for Ngāti Whakaue are inclusive of Maketū, and
the common marine areas out to Otāiti. Because our hapū lived on the
coast, and could gain access to the sea from the estuary, many of the
whanau owned their own boats.
TRADITIONAL FISHING PRACTICES
50. We have had the following practices handed down to us:
(a) The moana can feed all of us, take what you need, don’t waste kai;
(b) Share your kai, don’t be greedy;
(c) Be respectful, don’t throw your shells back in the moana;
(d) Throw back baby fish and breeding fish of any sort;
(e) Don’t be paru (rubbish), bury the shells when you get home; and
Page | 10
(f) Kaitiakitanga - be a good kaitiaki and pass on your knowledge so the
younger generation know the tikanga (customs).
EFFECTS AS A RESULT OF THE OIL SPILL ON THE LAND AND COASTAL MARINE AREA
51. The natural character of the Maketū Estuary and Okurei, Maketū were
adversely affected because of oil that was discharging from the grounded
MV Rena.
52. The discharge reached Maketū around the 13 October 2011 or there about.4
53. I remember driving up to the Maketū Surf Club around lunch time and there
were many of the local whanau and Maketū people standing on the side
walk beside the surf club watching the waves breaking on the shore. There
were some whanau who I had not seen for some time standing on the
footpath outside the carpark in shock, they were looking at the waves
crashing onto the seashore; the waves were black. When we took a closer
look at what was that black substance in the waves it was oil. The black
waves just kept on coming.
54. I realised just how sick Tangaroa was at that moment and how much
damage the black oil was doing to Papatuanuku.
55. I blamed the MV Rena Shipping Owners, the captain and the crew for their
reckless behaviour and for what was happening to us at that moment. It
was a time to reflect on just how important Tangaroa and Papatuanuku were
to us.
56. The people were trying to gauge what to do, how to stop the pollution from
coming to Maketū. They started to openly argue with each other in public,
the tension and anger was starting to build; this was not normal behaviour
for Maketū people.
4 Wikipedia, Sequence of Events (2016). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rena_oil_spill Cited on
23 December 2016. “On 13 October 2011, Maritime New Zealand ordered beaches from Mount Maunganui to Maketu Point, including the Maketu Estuary, to be closed to the public”.
Page | 11
57. The Surf Club Chairman opened the club which is located on the shores of
the Maketū estuary so people could gather their thoughts and calm down. I
was a surf life guard at that time and the only woman qualified as such, so
my time was spent working form the Surf Club during this time.
58. We had kuia coming up and saying they couldn’t help clean the beaches,
but they could help feed the people by making a kai. This was the attitude of
the local Maketū community. In the days that it took to clean the beaches
koroua Te Wano would watch from the car the people cleaning the beaches.
His wife who was well into her 70s by then helped clean the Okurei rocks
with her mokopuna. Our people were not recognised for their efforts.
59. The MV Rena has changed how our people view the natural resources.
Since the oil slicks discharged onto the Maketū beaches it is normal for the
locals to look for paru from the wreck on the beach.
60. I consider the Regional Council decision to grant the Owner consent as a
licence to keep a ticking time bomb off the coast, which will continue to
pollute our coast line and threaten further major damage to the mauri of our
marine environment. There are harmful toxins remaining on the wreck that
are going to kill off kaimoana and fish species. Ngāti Whakaue living in
Maketū are a community that are connected to the sea. The MV Rena
grounding has caused sadness and will continue to be a threat to our way of
life for as long as the wreck, the containers and the contaminants remain at
Otāiti and on the surrounding seabed.
CONTAMINANTS STILL ON THE MV RENA WRECK THAT MAY HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE MAKETŪ COASTLINE
61. Bunker fuel is carried by big ships such as the Rena. This is much thicker
and more toxic fuel.5 There is a deposit of bunker c that has not been
mentioned still on the MV Rena. How do you deal with toxins you cannot
see?
62. There is also diesel, oil, TBT Paint and copper. I also understand the
presence of mercury still needs to be confirmed.
5 'The wreck of the Rena ', URL: https://nzhistory.govt.nz/culture/shipping-containers/rena-
disaster, (Ministry for Culture and Heritage), updated 14-Jul-2016
Page | 12
63. The Owner and its consultants say that the contaminant level is safe
because it will disperse in the Bay of Plenty. However, Dr Mead points out
at paragraph [10] of his evidence that the contamination levels today are
above international standards and guidelines, and Rena will continue to
degrade and release further contaminants into the environment over coming
decades if left in place.
64. These scientific views must be looked at in terms of the fact that both
situations described are a significant adverse effect on the mauri (life force)
of the surrounding coastal environment. Any contamination of Otāiti and the
surrounding marine environment is a contamination of the mauri of the
ocean and Te Arawa Takitai Moana. We live on the coast, we live from the
ocean, and we are culturally defined by this relationship. If the ocean/coast
is healthy, we are healthy. If they are sick, we are sick.
EFFECTS AS A RESULT OF THE GROUNDING ON KAIMOANA
65. At the Regional Council hearing, my submission was on the pollution, and
contamination of kai and our traditional fishing grounds.
66. The preference of our locals is to collect pipi from the Waihi estuary.
Previously it did not matter to us whether we went to Maketū or to Waihi.
Now after the Rena and the oil spill on the Maketū beach the preference is
the Waihi estuary.
67. On 19 December 2016 I was at a Whaikorero wananga at Whakaue
Kaipapa Marae and the same thing came up. People at the table asked
where the pipi were from before eating them. They were saying that the
Maketū estuary pipi are contaminated and they won’t eat them because of
the MV Rena contaminants. Some of these people are kaumatua who have
grown up eating pipi from the Maketū estuary. There is a lot of sadness,
because the people feel dissociated from the immediate coastal area that
defines who we are. The same questions are asked when fish is brought
back to the Marae from our wider traditional fishing grounds, which include
Otāiti and surrounding areas.
Page | 13
CULTURAL EFFECTS OF MV RENA REMAINING ON OTĀITI AND THE SEABED
68. The MV Rena has adversely affected our way of life, our tikanga of living off
the bounty provided by Ngā Māori Atua.
69. The wreck and the containers continue to breakdown in the sea. The
removal of these will go a long way towards restoring the mauri.
70. The technical reports the Owner/Applicant has produced do not cover
bunker c or diesel which are harmful toxins. What are the effects of these
toxins? What are the effects on the marine ecosystems when these toxins
are released?
71. The failure of the Owner/Applicant to provide evidence on diesel and bunker
c oil that is still within the MV Rena wreck adversely affects our role as
kaitiakitanga.
72. The preservation and protection of the moana are at stake. We see it as our
responsibility as kaitiaki to continue to challenge the Regional Council’s
decision.
73. We have found it difficult to exercise our kaitiakitanga responsibilities given
the Owner’s lawyers keep insisting that the evidence of Ngāti Whakaue “is
not relevant to the issues properly before the Court”.6 I feel it is important to
point out that much of the time we could have used preparing evidence for
this hearing was wasted by the Owner’s continued attempts to have Ngāti
Whakaue kicked out of case. The Owner’s approach has simply heaped
insult on top of injury.
IMPACT OF THE OIL SPILL AND THE WRECK ON HEALTH
74. People decline to eat kaimoana (seafood) at the marae, except where it
comes from the Waihi Estuary or the supermarket. It is a separation of our
people from their Māori food, which adversely impacts our beliefs and
values.
6 Matthew Casey QC letter to the Parties dated 28 October 2016, at paragraphs [3] and [4].
Page | 14
75. It is another form of colonisation when the Owner and the Regional Council
say that Māori belief in cleaning up your paru and taking it away with you is
thought of as too harsh, and a punishment rather than a responsibility.
76. Monitoring the effects does not actually do anything about the adverse
effects of the wreck. Where is the requirement in the Council’s decision to
remove the contaminants or any part of the wreck? Where is the well-being
of Tangaroa taken into consideration? The decision does not go far enough
in asserting kaitiakitanga or insisting that those responsible for the wreck
should take their paru away in accordance with tikanga.
IMPACT OF THE OIL SPILL AND THE WRECK ON LIVING STANDARDS
77. The preference of the people these days is to buy kuku (mussels) from the
supermarket as opposed to ruku kai (diving for kai). Money spent where it
could have been saved, less exercise, less quality of life, lack of passing on
knowledge about the sea and adverse impacts on our tikanga.
TE ARAWA CULTURAL IMPACTS ASSESSMENT
78. I would like to take the opportunity to challenge the Te Arawa Cultural
Impacts Assessment (CIA). I consider the Te Arawa CIA as a takahia mana
(tramping on our mana) of Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū hapū in the written
form. It is just as damaging as leaving the Owner’s rubbish at Otāiti. I
attached a copy of Te Arawa CIA as annexure “A”.
79. It seems to make a number of derogatory remarks concerning the Rūnanga,
and members of the Rūnanga, with little regard of adverse effects on
reputations or personal feelings. This report was commissioned by the
Owner as a collective report. The author fails to identify itself or themselves.
80. I regularly write CIA reports, and I consider this report culturally substandard
in its lack of regard for tribal authority and the people it claims to represent.
Who gave the author the mandate to speak in such a manner about other iwi
and hapū, or even individuals? This goes against the tikanga (customs) of
our people. The Commissioners in the decision spoke of how the Māori
submitters respected each other whether they were supporting or opposing
the consents. The Commissioners were obviously unable to establish an
Page | 15
informed view, as the report fails to observe the respect that the hapū of Te
Arawa Takitai Moana have for one another. I consider that this respect is
evident in the tangata whenua evidence that has been filed on behalf of
Ngāti Whakaue and the Kaumatua Forum.
81. When a report is written on behalf of other iwi/hapū there is normally a peer
review. I do not see any evidence to show that any iwi/hapū peer reviewed
the contents of the Te Arawa CIA. I would like to know who signed this
report off.
82. I discussed this CIA with the Beca Consultant at the time, Shadrach
Rolleston. He stated that the CIA was that of the author and that any
changes would be up to the author. I disagree with his statement. We did
not mandate a Te Arawa CIA writer to write any report that would belittle the
Rūnanga, myself or others.
83. An Assessment of Adverse Effects should identify any persons who will be
affected by a proposal, any consultation undertaken, and any response to
the views of any person consulted. Early consultation with Māori is best
practice for resource consent applicants (where Māori interests may be
affected) in order to establish a working relationship with tangata whenua,
demonstrate compliance with the relevant provisions in Part 2 of the
Resource Management Act, and to reduce the likelihood of future difficulties
arising, including litigation.7
84. The proverb “Te Arawa ki Tai” is consistently used in the report giving the
impression that statements within the report are made on behalf of the
iwi/hapū of Te Arawa coastal people. This is not correct. The report
represents the views of the authors, not the people of Te Arawa Takitai
Moana.
85. “Te Arawa k Tai Charitable Trust” (Trust) is a legal name. It is not a
mandated entity of Te Arawa Takitai Moana, and it certainly has no authority
to speak for Ngāti Whakaue. Most of our people when they heard the
Trust’s name immediately asked “who are they?”
7 Environment Foundation (2016) Consultation on Resource Consent page.
http://www.environmentguide.org.nz/rma/maori-and-the-rma/ cited 31 December 2016.
Page | 16
86. The trustees on the Trust include Raewyn Bennett, Pia Bennett, Te Kipa
Kepa Morgan and Justin Te Kowhai (the Iwi diver the Owner paid to dive the
MV Rena).8 This Trust, according to the decision of the Commissioners, is
to administer $1.25 million on behalf of Te Arawa ki Tai iwi/hapū. 9 The
Rūnanga emphasises again we have not mandated this Trust. We agree
with Te Arawa Takitai Moana Kaumatua Forum resolutions. These
resolutions are attached as annexure “B”.
87. In the Te Arawa CIA there is reference to Non-kaitiaki o Te Arawa (p5) –
Who decides when you are a non-kaitiaki? What is non-kaitiaki? Is there
such a person or did the author just make it up? This to me reflects the
standard of the rest of the CIA report.
88. Proof of active kaitiakitanga – The author refers to works carried out by
“ahikā” (p7 of the CIA). The report fails to identify that the Maketū Action
Group fought for 20 years to have the Kaituna River returned to the Maketū
estuary. Members of the action group include Aroha and Barrie Wilkinson.
These people were also responsible for the formation of the Taiapure
located in Maketū (p10 of the CIA). They are members of the Rūnanga and
Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū hapū. This is another example of loose
statements contained within the CIA, where the author uses the phrase ahi
kaa rather than recognising Ngāti Whakaue.
89. The CIA states that “[t]he Runanga, true to its word did not take part in the
clean-up” (p4 of the CIA). We dispute this remark, given the Chairman,
Manu Pene, spent three weeks volunteering his time and efforts to clean up
the Maketū beaches. Many of our members were on the beaches and in the
Whakaue Kaipapa Marae kitchen. The author fails to acknowledge the
efforts of Ngāti Whakaue and the Maketū community in the CIA report.
90. The CIA states that “Ngāti Whakaue individuals and whanau who do not
recognise the Whakaue ki Maketū runanga as representing their whakaue
interests” (p7 of the CIA). Regardless of whether there are disagreements
amongst individuals, the Rūnanga is the Iwi Authority legally mandated by
8 Charities Commission (2016) Office details page https://www.register.charities.govt.nz/CharitiesRegister/ViewCharity?accountId=03421aa5-55ce-e311-8f2f-00155d0d1916&searchId=d33dd77a-b5d7-49c8-83c1-c5b1b83b6760. Cited 31 December 2016.
9 Decision of Panel on MV Rena Resource Consents Application, p 120 Augier conditions.
Page | 17
Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū hapū. The Rūnanga has a large membership
database and we elect our governance board in accordance with the
Charter. Again, the author’s unsupported statements fail to provide a truthful
or constructive picture of Ngāti Whakaue.
91. I rebut the statement that “Ngāti Makino were asked to lead on the 27
February 2013” (p7 of the CIA). This refers to a hui at the Ngāti Whakaue
Kaipapa marae between NMHT and the Owner (see paragraph’s [105] to
[109] of this statement for further discussion about this hui). In simple terms,
the Rūnanga was never informed this hui would take place and certainty did
not provide a mandate to Ngāti Makino or NMHT to undertake negotiations
with the Owner on our behalf. We were not even invited to the hui. I am still
hugely disappointed that we opened the doors of our marae and found our
hospitality repaid in this way.
92. Ngāti Whakaue and the Maketū community cleaned up the beaches of
Maketū. It will continue to be the same people when the discharge
continues in the future. Our people and the community are referred to as
ahikaa or Maketū (Te Arawa) in the CIA.
93. I am disappointed with the Te Arawa CIA Report. It has nothing positive to
say. It boosts the egos and promotes the actions of a few. It shows no
respect to Ngāti Whakaue, who got stuck in and did what needed to be done
when the Rena grounded.
94. It is important for me to rebut these statements because the CIA formed part
of the evidence that the Commissioners considered in coming to their
decision to grant the Applicant resource consent to leave the wreck and its
contaminants on Otāiti.
95. It is a shame that Ngāti Whakaue was unable to properly put our case
forward at the Council hearing. Unfortunately, the Trust was initially simply
referred to as Te Arawa ki Tai, and many people thought that the Kaumatua
Forum was taking a lead for coastal Te Arawa. This confusion meant that
we did not get a submission filed in time and the Commissioners refused the
Ngāti Whakaue request to be heard separately. The Commissioners limited
us to appearing for 15 minutes under Mr Hemi Bennett’s submission, which I
consider prevented us from being appropriately recognised and provided for
Page | 18
by the Regional Council in its decision. I attach a copy of the
Commissioners’ decision on our opportunity to speak as annexure “C”.
IMPACT OF THE OIL SPILL AND THE WRECK ON RECREATION
96. People have changed their ways in order to avoid contaminated food. They
have changed from going out diving and fishing for kaimoana to buying it in
a supermarket, all this to avoid contaminated food.
97. People have and will change how they utilise their time in the Spring and
Summer seasons.
98. Divers are more aware that the food they gather may be contaminated.
99. During the submission hearings, divers from Maketū that I interviewed
worried that they were taking home contaminated food and feeding this food
to their whanau. They felt the food did not taste the same, especially when
diving around parts of Motiti where the oil discharged.
100. Gathering kai is recreation to our people, to know they have provided kai to
the whanau, hapū, iwi is self-satisfying and promotes self-worth.
FAILURE TO CONSULT
101. During the initial consultation Shadrach Rolleston asked to see me. He
showed me some photographs of debris from the wreck. He did not state
that: (a) he was carrying out consultation for the MV Rena Owner; (b) the
Owner would be filing resource consent applications to leave the MV Rena
wreck on Otāiti; or (c) that the Owner wanted to leave substances (including
harmful substances) in the marine environment. He did not state that he
wanted to consult with the Rūnanga on the resource consent application that
was later lodged.
102. The Rūnanga initiated a hui with the MV Rena Owner at Whakaue Kaipapa
Marae. A cultural values assessment (CVA) for Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū
was written at our expense because Mr Rolleston on behalf of the Owner
was quite specific that the Owner/Applicant would only fund collective
cultural impact assessments.
Page | 19
103. We felt that was offensive and that we had our own history. We did not file
the CVA with the Owner/Applicant because the report was written for us and
we did not feel that we should give our own history to someone that did not
appreciate it. I attach a copy of the Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū CVA,
prepared by M Horne, dated May 2014 as annexure “D”. I also attach a
copy of the Ngāti Whakahemo Iwi CVA prepared by M Horne, dated May
2014 as annexure “E”. I note that Ngāti Whakaue is mentioned in the Motiti
report.
104. Ngāti Whakaue are at a loss as to why we have never been properly
consulted by the Owner/Applicant. It should not have been difficult to make
contact with the Rūnanga. The Regional Council holds records of the
Rūnanga’s contact details and planning documents and the area over which
kaitiakitanga is exercised, as discussed above in paragraph [23]. The
Owner made contact with other respective iwi authorities, but not with the
Rūnanga. This is despite having been invited by Ngāti Whakaue to our
Marae in Maketū.
105. On the 27 February 2013 or thereabouts I had a former Rūnanga trustee
come to my house and say there was a hui at Whakaue Kaipapa marae.
We did not know that a hui was being held at the marae, which is not
normal. So I went to the marae with her. When we walked into the whare
tūpuna I did not recognise the people that were there, I knew they were not
local Ngāti Whakaue. I was told the hui was confidential and by invitation
only. There were people sitting where my koroua Te Wano Walters and
other kaumatua would normally sit, on the paepae. I was absolutely
shocked and livid at the event that was unfolding by this stage.
106. Then I saw the Owners, the insurers and his team walk into our whare
tūpuna. They were consulting with NMHT and other tribes in our own whare
tūpuna without Ngāti Whakaue present. It was at that moment that I thought
where was Ngati Whakaue’s consultation? Someone had set this meeting
up between the parties that deliberately left out Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū.
107. I thought just about all New Zealanders (Māori and Pakeha) knew that
tikanga requires manuhiri (guests) to be welcomed onto a marae by the
tangata whenua people of that marae. I was almost speechless with anger
Page | 20
that these people had entered our marae without the traditional invitation,
and that people were sitting on the paepae of our kaumatua. There were so
many breaches of tikanga that I felt whakamā (embarrassed).
108. I went home and emailed hapū members setting out what I had seen and
what had taken place. The marae Komiti were informed of this hui. They
had always thought that our interests were being looked after by the so-
called clean-up coordinators. The Maketū Taiapure Committee had booked
the marae so the marae Komiti did not know other Iwi were using our whare
tūpuna for confidential, invitation only hui with the MV Rena Owner. I
believe the Beca consultants knew they were not talking to Ngāti Whakaue
ki Maketū hapū and this again was a takahia mana.
109. What has eventuated from this event is the Rūnanga has had to step up to
deal with this matter. The Whakaue Kaipapa hearing day saw the marae
komiti and Rūnanga combine to help heal some of the hurt that we have
endured.
THE WAY THE RENA OWNERS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES BEHAVED TOWARDS HAPŪ
110. The Rūnanga initiated the consultation for Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū after
the 27 February 2013 hui where the Owners met with other groups in our
whare tūpuna.
111. The Owner, by that point, appeared only to deal with NMHT and those who
were in support of it. We tried to get the Owner to meet with us on our
marae. This never happened.
112. My own thoughts are the Owner was guided by their consultants initially.
Over time the Owner and the Rena team identified who they could persuade
to support the consents to dump the wreck and discharge contaminants
including harmful substances into the marine environment and those who
would challenge the consent/s.
113. Mr Zacharatos and his team were polite and courteous whenever we have
subsequently met. They go out of their way to shake hands and remember
people’s names. I liken this to how the missionaries appeased Māori when
Page | 21
they first came to Maketū. Their behaviour is polite, but their intent is
focused on their goal – leaving the wreck on the reef. They pay lip service
to our customs, but they are only interested in saving the Owner the cost of
removal. That is what they want, and that is what they care about. Their
actions are guided by this, and not by any real desire to understand our
kawa or tikanga.
FAILURE TO ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS
114. Our concerns have not been addressed by the Owner/Applicant. We tried to
advise them that Ngāti Whakaue were the main affected tangata whenua
that lived in Maketū, but they made up their minds to go with other groups. I
heard a remark that the Owner/Applicant decided to go with the people on
the ground in the clean-up. Well if that was the case then they should have
been talking to Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū. We asked about the work
contracts and never received a straight answer on who was carrying that
work out. We wanted to clean up our own beaches in Maketū. People were
still finding oil and the plastic beads washing up on the beaches. We also
had used tyres washing up at Okurei Point, Maketū.
THE OWNERS/APPLICANT’S FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND OUR SPIRITUAL / CULTURAL ASSOCIATION WITH OTĀITI
115. The Owner/Applicant did not and still does not understand ahikaa. Ngāti
Whakaue ki Maketū hapū ahikaa extends from 1829 to the present day. We
are spiritually and culturally connected to Maketū and the various
environments. The fishermen and divers have been the ones maintaining
the connection to the common marine area through whakapapa, the people,
our Whakaue Kaipapa marae, the handing down of responsibilities of
kaitiakitanga through the generations. This includes the stories of using
Otāiti as a wananga area to teach the younger marae fishermen and divers.
This is what makes us unique in our own right. The Applicant has not
recognised that about Ngāti Whakaue.
Page | 22
FAILURE TO RECOGNISE AND PROVIDE FOR NGĀTI WHAKAUE
116. Ngāti Whakaue and its relationship to the coastal environment has not been
recognised or provided for. Otāiti has a wreck, substances and containers
still on the reef. The Regional Council has recommended the consent/s be
granted in their entirety. Justice will be done when our kaitiaki role has been
fulfilled and the parts of the wreck the containers and the harmful toxins are
removed from the marine environment.
117. Justice for the Te Arawa Takitai Moana Kaumatua Forum has not been
served. If it had been they would not have passed a resolution to become a
s274 party to the appeal. A copy of this resolution is attached as annexure
“F”.
THE LIMITATION FUND
118. We took part in the Limitation Fund as one of six iwi entities. The purpose of
the Limitation Fund was to deal with commercial loss. The MV Rena team
said that iwi did not suffer commercially. We certainly did, I wanted some
restitution for the expenses, at that time, to our hapū of losing our food
source during the worst of the oil spill. The money we claimed from the
Limitation Fund was to reimburse us for the loss of our kaimoana caused by
the MV Rena during the period of the grounding and initial clean-up. An
agreement was reached with the Owner, which I cannot discuss because it
is subject to a confidentiality clause. I can say, however, that the agreement
does not stop iwi from pursuing their rights concerning the Owner’s proposal
to seek consent to leave the wreck on Otāiti and the seabed.
FAILURE TO GRANT RELIEF
119. Ngāti Whakaue seek removal of the wreck in full or part, as well as the
removal of the contaminants (e.g. diesel, bunker c and oil) and the
containers from the MV Rena that are in the marine area. Furthermore,
Ngāti Whakaue:
(a) seek appropriate recognition and provision for our cultural
relationship with the Maketū coastal and marine environment. We
are extremely saddened by the fact that the Owner failed to consult
Page | 23
with us directly as the most affected hapū of Te Arawa Takitai
Moana. It was a real blow to our mana when the Commissioners
reinforced the Owner’s poor consultation by failing to hear from us in
our own right.
(b) seek preservation of the natural character of Otāiti. The natural
character is more than just the surface of the marine area. It also
encompasses the natural character below the surface to the seabed.
The MV Rena wreck compromises the natural character of the reef.
The wreck remains are unnatural and are made of materials that will
breakdown and pollute the environment. The natural character will
be adversely affected. Ngāti Whakaue traditional fishing grounds
also includes a site where the stern is lodged.
(c) seek protection of the outstanding natural features of Otāiti. Otāiti is
known to Ngāti Whakaue as an area where intergenerational
knowledge was passed down. It is where divers and fishermen went
to learn from their elders of knowledge. Otāiti provided the
outstanding natural features and landscapes for these wananga.
(d) oppose the identification of the wreck as a heritage feature. The MV
Rena wreck does not add any benefits to protecting the historic
heritage of Otāiti. The wreck is on a traditional fishing ground where
Ngāti Whakaue used to pass on the hapū knowledge of the
fishermen. The heritage for this reef is impacted in a negative way
because of the presence of the MV Rena wreck.
(e) seek the protection of our customary rights. The Rūnanga has
applied for the recognition of customary rights over Maketū estuary,
coastal areas and fishing grounds in the surrounding marine
environment (including Otāiti). We, together with other hapū who
have customary rights in this area, do not wish to inherit the Owner’s
paru (rubbish).
(f) oppose the consents because the decision compromises our ability
to exercise our kaitiakitanga responsibilities.
Page | 24
120. All the Regional Council’s decision currently covers is monitoring. It has not
called for the removal of any part of the wreck, or for any recovery of the
containers and harmful contaminants. The most disappointing aspect of the
decision is Regional Council’s failure to address the Māori submitters who
opposed the resource consent/s’ concerns about the impact of the wreck
and its contaminants on the mauri of Otāiti and the surrounding coastal
environment.
Dated this 3rd day of January 2017
________________________
Maria Brenda Horne
ANNEXURE “A”
TE ARAWA CULTURAL IMPACTS ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSAL TO LEAVE PART(S) OF THE RENA SHIPWRECK ON OTĀITI – DECEMBER 2013
Te Arawa Cultural Impacts Assessment of the Proposal to Leave
part(s) of the Rena Shipwreck on Otaiti
Picture courtesy of maori.org.nz
Prepared for Beca December 2013
2
Table of Contents
Section 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Te Timatanga: ......................................................................................................................................... 3
Section 2: Te Arawa Cultural Impact Assessment ........................................................................ 8 2.1 Purpose: ................................................................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Strategic themes ..................................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Objectives: ............................................................................................................................................... 8
Section 3: Methodology .................................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Hui and various workshops .................................................................................................................. 9 3.2 Literature review: ................................................................................................................................... 9
Section 4: Te Arawa and the Coast .............................................................................................. 12 4.1 Determining which values should be assessed: ............................................................................. 13
Section 5: Explanation of values and the impacts ..................................................................... 17 5.1 Kaitaikaitanga ...................................................................................................................................... 17
5.1.1 Impacts on kaitiakitanga: ........................................................................................................................... 19 5.2 Tikanga, rangatiratanga, whanaungatanga, whakapapa, ahi kaa, identity .............................. 20 5.3 Tapu and Mana: ................................................................................................................................... 21
5.3.1 Impacts to tapu: ............................................................................................................................................. 24 5.4 Customary fisheries, identity, (seascape icon) pakiwaitara, indigenous knowledge, Matauranga maori ..................................................................................................................................... 26
5.4.1 Impacts: ............................................................................................................................................................ 27 5.5 Mauri ..................................................................................................................................................... 28 5.6 Utu, noa, muru, rahui ......................................................................................................................... 29
Section 6: Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 31 6.1 Summary and Recommendations: ................................................................................................... 31
Appendix A: Maketu (Te Arawa) Hui and Workshops re: Rena Resource Consent ............. 33
Appendix B: He puakanga nā ngā iwi o Te Arawa ki Maketu i pākinongia ........................... 35
Victim Impact Statement of Maketu (Te Arawa) ....................................................................... 37
3
Section 1: Introduction
1.1 Te Timatanga:
Maritime New Zealand (MNZ) is this morning responding to an incident near Tauranga Harbour, after the 236m cargo vessel Rena struck the Astrolabe Reef around 2.20am. Wednesday, 5 October 20111
This disaster set off a series of consequences which went beyond a ship colliding with a reef in the Bay of Plenty. From a Te Arawa ki Tai tangata whenua perspective, the lingering consequences have been both socio-‐cultural and socio-‐political as well as environmental and cultural. Those particular threads point to the complexities of context when preparing reports on the cultural aspects of the Rena disaster, not least of which are the various overlays of inter-‐tribal and intra-‐tribal issues. The Rena collision with Otaiiti occurred during critical Treaty settlement and negotiation times among coastal iwi in the Tauranga Moana and the Te Arawa coast. Given that particular political situation, it appears that there were other objectives besides cleaning the beaches prevalent at the time and even subsequently. Issues of mana moana arose. For example, Maketu (Te Arawa) asked the hastily formed “ Te Moana o Toi Iwi Leaders” (TMaTILF) forum of Tauranga to desist from speaking on behalf of Maketu (Te Arawa) in talks with Government and other agencies over the clean up process. This was the response from Mr. Awanui Black of TMaTILF apparently justifying his mandate to continue to speak on behalf of the Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Cleanup Committee and volunteers.
“By way of explanation, Ngati Pukenga are ahi ka roa with interests in Maketu, Little Waihi (Waewaetutuki), Pukaingataru and Paengaroa”2
It needs to be pointed out right at the start that we in Maketu know who we are. During the oil cleanup phase this was not the only claim made about ahi kaa status by persons not from Maketu (not ahi kaa) or Te Arawa or trying to close down the voices of the Maketu clean-‐up leaders, who happened to be all female. Others speaking for us is one of the issues that has never been resolved, as indicated by the interviews for the Kua Mamae te Ngakau3 report and lately by the Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Resource Consent working group (herein referred to as “the Working Group”).
I am really pissed off when I hear people try and make gains on the back of the oil cleaners. The lowest of the low as far as I’m concerned. Like kicking people when they are down. Really disgusting. Its changed my view of certain people and Iwi4.
Claiming of a right to liaise with authorities, including the Crown, on behalf of Maketu (Te Arawa) appeared to have more to do with positioning for local Treaty settlements than with restoring the environment. Relationships, whanaungatanga and respect for inter-‐tribal and hapu world-‐views went out the window whilst those so disempowered were putting all their energies into cleaning the beaches. An article in the Ngai Tahu news 2011 publication discovered recently confirms Maketu (Te Arawa) thinking in relation to the political agendas vs the environment at the time:
1 Maritime NZ Press Release 5 October 2011, www.maritimenz.govt.nz 2 See email from Mr Black 2011 3 Kua Mamae te Ngakau, unpublished Cultural Impact Report on Oil Impacts Maketu (Te Arawa), R. Bennett (2013) 4 See Working group interviews
4
Riri Ellis (from influential Tauranga iwi Ngāi Te Rangi) is project assistant with the combined Tauranga Moana iwi [Rena] response. “We are seeking technical advice but it remains unclear what impact the Rena disaster is having on our economic activities, which include commercial fisheries and tourism,” Riri says. However, Riri, who is also her iwi’s Treaty of Waitangi negotiations manager, says what is clear is that this incident may have some impact on the treaty settlement aspirations of Ngāi Te Rangi. “There is a natural connection between what has happened in this disaster and our treaty settlement aspirations. Whilst this is a disaster, and the treaty settlement process is about settling treaty grievances, there is no doubt that the activities are colliding up against each other5
There were other political challenges arising from mana moana scenarios, both within and outside Te Arawa. For example, the Runanga o Ngati Whakaue ki Maketu manager’s response to a request from one of the Maketu co-‐ordinators to desist from complicating the clean-‐up management by by-‐passing the agreed procedures of the co-‐ordinating Committee6
I think what started out with good intentions is getting a bit like 'mana munching.' Happy to help out any other Iwi, however this Runanga would prefer not to be part of anymore of this communication7
The Runanga, true to its word, did not take part in the clean up. Within Te Arawa, a meeting called to establish a mandating authority for the Te Arawa coast during the clean up crisis was thrust upon Maketu tangata whenua oil cleaners in the middle of the crisis forcing kaitiaki to cope with what was in fact a series of crises. Maketu ahi kaa and kaitiaki oil cleaners’ voluntary work was being used to advance a variety of political claims from various Iwi groups while the ahi kaa kaitiaki were totally focussed on restoring their beaches8 and unable to respond effectively to these challenges.9 On top of the politics, ahi kaa kaitiaki had to cope with the incompetencies and miscommunications arising from the Maritime NZ Incident Command Centre (ICC). Maketu Coastal kaitiaki had well established and strong working relationships around kaitiakitanga with authorities which almost became subsumed via the TMaTILF and their continuing usurpation of authority to speak for Maketu (Te Arawa). The main issues for Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Cleanup Committee was the lack of professionalism, kaitiakitanga, environmental, scientific and resource management knowledge among the group and their appointees at ICC. Essential requirements one would have thought for any personnel in an environmental crisis situation. There were Maori people in that ICC structure who weren’t environmental, didn’t have sufficient experience or knowledge around the environment and how it works, operational stuff, the RMA and all that comes with the RMA, knowing your councils, who’s who, networks, staff, scientists and who does what.10 More importantly, culturally, was the lack of understanding of the cultural and social dynamics within the Maketu community which needed careful management for a successful clean-‐up11 with
5 Te Karaka issue 52, December 2011 . Ngāi tahu publications limited iSSN N0. 1173/6011 14 6 Established at Whakaue marae by tangata whenua after public meeting on October 12th 2011 7 See email from Maria Horne 8 Ongatoro is the shortened tupuna name for Maketu beach, “Te Awa o Ngatoroirangi”. 9 October 27th 2012 NZ Herald Ngaraima Taingahue 10 See Kua Mamae Interview Committee 11 See Kua Mamae te Ngakau report
5
minimal social and cultural disruptions, including an undermining of our tikanga in regards to the moana o Te Arawa.
In our own community, an MP wanted me to use the surf-‐club, she was quite insistent. She was trying to insist that it [the clean-‐up] be placed at the Surf-‐club. People from outside the area trying to dictate what happened in our community. I said no, we are taking it back to the marae.... Oh that was because it was election time. She must have thought she would get more votes from the Surf club. She just has no bloody idea of Maketu dynamics12
An email to the Maketu Cleanup Committee in response to an invite from Tauranga Moana on 14 October 2011 summed up the Maketu (Te Arawa) position:
We are in a better place than these fullas I think, especially with achieving things on the ground. I just dont want them talking for us or organising us. I dont think we even need them -‐ they havent done much for us so far except create layers of process and call meetings twice a day. We cant be expected to attend two hui in Tauranga everyday. Its ridiculous but they dont get it. This hui today is right on low tide at Maketu when our cleanup crews will be on the beaches. I want to be here not at a meeting but I think I will go to make sure no-‐one talks for or over us or is elected to speak for us without us knowing them or approving. Our plan is falling in to place nicely here. I dont want it to be upset or delayed by process created by ignorant outsiders13.
In summary, the Crown (and its Ministries), Territorial authorities and TMaTILF and non-‐kaitiaki Te Arawa were obstructive and unhelpful to the process of a successful clean up and Recovery plan from a Maketu (Te Arawa) perspective. The Councils’ subterfuge continues today as it seems does the TMaTILF ruse. This history has created ongoing tensions for Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Recovery Committee14 which has carried over into the Recovery plan and into the work on consultation over the intention of the Rena owners to apply for a resource consent to leave the wreck on Otaiiti as well as inter-‐Iwi treaty settlement negotiations. As far as Maketu kaitiaki oil cleaners were concerned, and still are, the issue was/is about the moana. The Kua Mamae te Ngakau (herein referred to as the “Kua mamae” report) report confirms the strong cultural connections to the takutai by the ahi kaa of Maketu. In response to the question why did you commit to the [voluntary] work of cleaning the beaches, two responses in particular typify the ahi kaa’s cultural views:
Tangaroa and Hinemoana me a raua tamariki and restoring our takutai and showing our tupuna, foremost Ngatoroirangi, that we were concerned for their mana, tapu and the mauri of the takutai15.
I was told by someone to do the job-‐ job needed to be done – Pakeha couldn’t do it – they don’t have the same values-‐ underpinning them – it was that basic whakapapa to Tangaroa-‐ therefore there’s more commitment rather than just the environment16 12 Kua mamae Inyerview folder 13 Email to various Rena All/Research folder 14 October 2011 14 The Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Recovery Committee took over from the Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Cleanup Committee after the completion of the oil clean up phase. 15 Refer Kua Mamae te Ngakau” 16 See Kua Mamae interview folder
6
The actual clean up in contrast to the politics, though stressful at the time, was able to be achieved through the focussed co-‐operation of all the volunteers involved with the Maketu centred clean up. The dedication and leadership of the ahi kaa whanau, with assistance from other Te Arawa kaitiaki and not excluding the many Pakeha and even foreign helpers and the co-‐operation of existing key pre-‐Rena relationships, ensured a successful oil clean up of the Maketu (Te Arawa) coast. The co-‐ordinators’ relationships with the volunteers was based on tikanga of respect and manaaki, as kaitiakitanga demands. The following statistics were collected by the kaitiaki co-‐ordinating Committee during October-‐Nov 2011 from the voluntary clean up work:17
• Trained 463 volunteers • Deployed and fed 879 volunteers • Collected 2855 bags of oil and oil debris • Volunteer cleaning hours -‐ 3358 • Marae HQ volunteer hours-‐ 697.75 • Cell phone 40 inward calls per day and 25 outward • 178 hours at ICC, 970 km travelled • Started cleaning 13th October • 50 continuous days cleaning
It needs to be highlighted at this point that the area of the coastline that the Maketu (Te Arawa) Cleanup Committee was responsible for was graded from heavy to lightly oil-‐impacted depending on the specific area18. Further most resources came from donations, individuals and businesses, not Maritime NZ. ICC released some funds to the Maketu Commitee after the crisis was over. The clean up in Maketu was successful because the ahi kaa were in charge. It showed that in a time of crisis, the Iwi runanga’s were quite useless as were Pakeha organisations. None of them would have been able to sustain a voluntary effort of unknown duration was the consensus of the kaitiaki19. The Maketu (Te Arawa) Working Group for the Rena Resource consent, (the Working Group) acknowledges the ongoing tensions arising from the crisis. As we start our evaluation of cultural impacts we acknowledge these experiences have contributed to our philosophical approach to this report. Further we want to leave any non-‐Te Arawa issues outside the main report, and focus this report on the Te Arawa approach. This is a Resource Management Act process, kawanatanga. Under previous Environment Court decisions, active kaitiakitanga does have a priority. The active ahi kaa kaitiaki of coastal Te Arawa were evident among the volunteer cleaners who co-‐ordinated and turned up consistently to clean the beaches and have continued their voluntary commitment by participating as part of the Recovery Committee and now the Working Group . There is also a history of submissions demonstrating kaitiakitanga of the coast and moana from Maketu, a decile 9 (in health terms) community. These include the return of the Kaituna river through Ongatoro, the WAI 4 Kaituna claim, the WAI 676 claim, the Maori fisheries claims, the establishment of the Maketu Taiapure, the Ohau wall diversion submissions and appeals, Tauranga City Council stormwater discharges to the Kaituna and associated matters, Foreshore and Seabed Bill submissions and the NZ Coastal Policy statement, right up to the present times with the review of
17 These are conservative stats. When the ICC finally sent some help, those persons brought their own recording forms therefore some volunteers signed forms which were taken away by the “helpers” and did not get into the locals’ database. 18 See presentation to Te Arawa Lakes Trust AGM 11 March 2012, Rangithi Marae. Area from Te Tumu to Kaokaoroa 19 See Kua mamae interviews
7
the BOPRC Coastal Environment Plan. There have also been Environment Court appeals on coastal matters, as well as the successful oil clean up and recovery work. This proof of active kaitiakitanga by ahi kaa kaitiaki should not be ignored in the resource consent process for the Rena wreck. Reference has already been made to the many individuals, organisations and businesses who supported the oil clean up and the recovery phase, but two Maori organisations have continued that support. These are the Maketu Taiapure and the Iwi of Ngati Makino. The Maketu Taiapure is a statutory organisation under the Fisheries Act20. Ngati Makino, is a “settled Iwi” with interests from Maketu to Matata. Makino provided kaumatua advice and political and operational support for the Maketu (Te Arawa) Cleanup and the Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Recovery Committee including the critical Maori socio-‐gender support needed for a wahine-‐led Oil Clean up and Recovery phase. Recognising that coastal issues needed to be managed in a cohesive approach going forward, the Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Recovery Committee advertised widely among Te Arawa Coastal Iwi to try to form a Te Arawa ki Tai Committee to collectively follow up on coastal issues, including the Rena resource consent process. There was not a uniform and consistent response and in some cases tensions within iwi were apparent. Some Iwi dynamics had changed over the 12 months. The Iwi who committed to the concept were Waitaha, Makino and Ngati Pikiao ki Tai with support Ngati Pikiao ki Uta and from Ngati Whakaue individuals and whanau who do not recognise the Ngati Whakaue ki Maketu runanga as representing their Whakaue interests. Ngati Rangitihi, Tapuika and Tuwharetoa21 representatives have also attended from time to time as have Ngati Pikiao ki uta and Te Arawa Lakes Trust22. The Maketu Taiapure continues its support. However hui were not restricted to ‘mandated” Iwi representatives and many of those attending were kaumatua or individuals from a range of Te Arawa coastal Iwi ki uta. At one of the hui held at Maketu, of Te Arawa Coastal Leaders, Ngati Makino were asked to lead the Resource Consent process on behalf of Te Arawa, including committing resources. This hui was held at Whakaue marae on 27th February 2013, preceding a hui with the ships owners. Ngati Makino established a working group incorporating kaitiaki who had been involved through the oil clean up phase and the recovery phase of the Rena disaster. The working group have been responsible for providing the direction for this report.
20 The Maketu Taiapure local fishery was established in 1996 pursuant to Part IV of the Maori Fisheries Act 1989 to set aside estuarine and shoreline coastal fishing areas of special significance to iwi or hapu as a source of food or for spiritual or cultural reasons. 21 Ngati Rangitihi and Tuwharetoa ki Kawerau confirmed their support for the Ngati Makino lead approach 1 November 2013, TPK office hui, Rotorua. 22 The Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Oil Clean up Committee and the Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Recovery Committee gave presentations at the 2012 and 2013 Te Arawa Lakes Trust AGMs which attract the greatest attendance of Te Arawa tangata then any other Te Arawa waka hui.
8
Section 2: Te Arawa Cultural Impact Assessment
2.1 Purpose: This cultural impact report provides a Te Arawa Cultural Impact Assessment on the proposed resource consent by the owners to leave the Rena wreck on Otaiiti. Ngati Makino negotiated the cultural impact report contract with the Rena ships consultants, BECA Consultants of Tauranga with the following themes and objectives:
2.2 Strategic themes • Operationalise kaitiakitanga by Te Arawa to the greatest extent possible under the Resource
Management Act 1991
• Te Arawa cultural impacts of the Rena experience of the proposal to leave part of the wreck on Otaiiti.
2.3 Objectives: 1. Conduct a Cultural Impact Analysis of the proposal to leave part of the Rena wreck remaining on Otaiiti 2. Document and analyse the cultural impacts on Te Arawa tangata; Te Arawa moana 3. Contribute towards remedies for restoration and measures to mitigate and/or remedy any adverse cultural effects 4. Develop a report for future reference by Maketu (Te Arawa) whanau The contract was finalised on 29th August 2013, and confirmed the same day by Ngati Makino. Disclaimer: The Working Group recognise the changing nature of the Rena situation in particular new or updated information. For example, since this report was started, a decision has been made by the owners to remove the “accommodation block” of the stern though the removal has not yet been effected. The working group reserve the right to change relevant sections of the report, including the recommendations, should any new information come to hand which requires a review.
9
Section 3: Methodology
3.1 Hui and various workshops23 A number of hui and workshops were held during the “Recovery phase” regarding the restoration of the mauri of the moana following the disaster. Led by Dr. Kepa Morgan, the initial workshop was advertised and people were freely able to participate. Subsequent workshop invitations were issued only to the initial attendees, though these were not “closed” events and included a boat trip to Otaiiti24 to assess the mauri of Otaiiti and to undertake some rituals of tikanga. These “mauri” hui, independently funded, have assisted with this report in several ways not least of which was identifying what factors should be used in assessing the post Rena state of the environment. The various hui also enabled focus on the task with less of the emotions surrounding the disaster and therefore with shaping a clearer picture of people’s perceptions of the values and impacts associated with Otaiiti. As has been referred to in the introduction section, various hui25 were held contemporaneously to investigate establishing a Te Arawa ki Tai forum, and information from those hui have also influenced this report. With the establishment of a “Working Group” on the Rena Resource Consent, led by Ngati Makino, further workshops and meetings with owners have both clarified issues and raised issues. These issues have fed into the report and assisted with identifying gaps. All in all there has been a wealth of information to work through for this report.
3.2 Literature review: The literature review was targeted towards information which demonstrated and explained clearly the kaitiakitanga values of Te Arawa ki Tai and Te Arawa whanui around the issues raised by the variety of participants when discussing the resource consent and cultural issues. As important was ensuring that the literature cited had credibility with Te Arawa as a whole, with kaitiaki and within an Environment Court process. Mindful of that, documents and reports which had been through some judicial process or semi-‐judicial process were reviewed as a start to explain our views on the cultural values we attach to Otaiiti. We have quoted extensively and used easily accessed public, material as another form of accountability. For example we have used Waitangi Tribunal reports and been generous with our quotes from those sources so that the proper context is clear. In the next instance we drew on reports or papers that were associated with recognised and respected authors and authorities. To be truthful we did not want to be seen as possibly “re-‐inventing the wheel” nor for our tikanga to be questioned by experts from other Iwi should a legal case arise. As this is a Te Arawa response, the literature search also sought respected Te Arawa sources. In this regard we are fortunate to be able to call on the writings of Makareti, a daughter of Te Arawa and her writings in “The Old-‐time Maori”26. As kaitiaki of the coast, we have also drawn on literature generated by ahi kaa in various forum over a number of years and which have been through a public accountability process. This starts with the
23 See Appendix A 24 January 19th, 2013. The invitation targetted all coastal Iwi representatives though not all responded. 25 See appendix A 26 Makereti (1938). The Old-‐Time Maori. Reprint. Auckland: New Womens Press Ltd.
10
1924 letter from Maketu ahi kaa to Apirana Ngata. It progresses to ahi kaa submissions on Kaituna and Ongatoro estuary, fisheries issues surrounding the Maori Fisheries Waitangi Tribunal claims, including the establishment of the Maketu Taiapure. This includes references to the affidavit on customary fishing to support the Te Arawa case to the High Court in the Urban authority case27. Then follows the more recent Kaituna diversion case and petitions, followed by ongoing submissions pertaining to coastal issues. There are other recognised papers which help explain specific values from a Te Arawa ki tai perspective. These are also drawn on for this report. 28 These documents include: the Akwe Kon guidelines29 for cultural impacts; Ministry of Justice publication: He Hïnätore ki te Ao Mäori: A Glimpse into the Mäori World30; selected WAI 262 Flora and Fauna reports and evidence and other Waitangi Tribunal Reports; the Law Commission publication: Maori Custom and Values in New Zealand Law31, and the Maori values supplement of MFE from the Making Good Decisions Workbook ME 679 Ministry for the Environment 2010.32 With the Rena disaster there followed submissions to the MFE on the recovery plan and the Cultural Impact report, “Kua mamae te ngakau33” on Rena oil impacts on Maketu (Te Arawa). Recently generated literature taken into account includes the cultural values report from Des Kahotea “Ko te mana o te Moana, He kai” and the Te Arawa Maketu (Te Arawa) Cultural Values Assessment Rena Wreck Removal by Pia Bennett. In addition there was the Victim Impact report34 prepared for the marae justice meeting held at Tahuwhakatiki marae, 13th April, 2012 which preceded the sentencing of the Captain of the Rena and the first mate (See appendix B). This is not to confuse our statement with the one read out in the Court prepared by Awanui Black which contained misinformation regarding Maketu’s situation. The literature review otherwise was driven by information and issues which arose during the many meetings by Te Arawa on Rena issues. There are many ahi kaa who want the wreck removed. It was recognised that talking about the disaster of the Rena impacts remains an emotional issue for some of our people; not to deny that there are those who want to move on, “it was an accident”35. A cultural impact report nevertheless
27 Affidavit: R. Bennett 28 See for e.g: Forester, M.E. (2012) He Whenua Papatipu: Kaitiakitanga and the Politics of Enhancing the Mauri of Wetlands PHD Thesis Maori Studies Massey University, Palmerston North See Ahumoana, The Aquaculture and Marine Farming Report WAI 953 2002 See Joseph, Robert 1999 Maori Customary Laws and Institutions Te Matahauariki Research Institute, University of Waikato See McGinnus, Michael (2012) Ocean Governance: The New Zealand Dimension Emerging Issues Programme Institute of Policy Studies School of Government Victoria University of Wellington p46 29 Akwe: Kon. (2004) Voluntary guidelines for the conduct of cultural, environmental and social impact assessments on Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Secretariat for the Convention on Biological Diversity. Montreal, Canada. www.biodiv.org 30 Ministry of Justice (2013). He Hïnätore ki te Ao Mäori: A Glimpse into the Mäori World. Wellington: Ministry of Justice This publication had input from three Te Arawa persons: Moira Rolleston, Merepeka Raukawa-‐Tait and Te Ariki Morehu. 31 NZ Law Commission (2001). Maori Custom and Values in New Zealand Law. Wellington: NZ Law Commission. 32 Good Decisions Workbook ME 679 Maori values supplement (2010) Atkins Holm Joseph Majurey Limited,for the Ministry for the Environmenthe Environment. 33 This report has not been publicly released as yet. 34 This Victim Impact Report statement was prepared for the Court hearing of the sentencing of the Captain and first mate and first presented at Tahuwhakatiki Marae and subsequently amended slightly for the visit of the owners to Maketu. The VIR was an organic response, not prepared according to academic conventions. 35 Interview customary fisheries cache
11
should make recommendations for dealing with negative impacts and we have. This is consistent with the Akwe Kon guidelines36 “(e) Identify and implement appropriate measures to prevent or mitigate any negative impacts of proposed developments”. It is important to recognise that addressing negative impacts is consistent with Te Arawa tikanga. The cultural processes of utu, muru and noa tikanga provide for just such a resolution37. The cultural values identified in this report were also tested against five reports produced as part of the brief of environmental assessment reports prepared on behalf of BECA for the Resource consent. These were The Cawthron Institute Report No 2258, Desktop Assessment on the Effects of The MV Rena Recovery operations on Marine mammals; Astrolabe Reef Metocean Conditions; Drake report on Issues of Navigation Safety relating to the wreck; Astrolabe Reef Wave Modelling and the Te Kowhai /Whariki Ltd. Underwater dive assessment of the reef. Interviews with Timi Te Po, Tame McCausland and Te Ariki Morehu, were transcribed and taken into account in this report38.
36 Akwe: Kon. (2004) Voluntary guidelines for the conduct of cultural, environmental and social impact assessments on Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Secretariat for the Convention on Biological Diversity. Montreal, Canada. www.biodiv.org Purpose and Approach, pages 5 & 6. 37 See for example He Hinatore 38 See transcriptions of interviews 20 and 27 October 2013
12
Section 4: Te Arawa and the Coast
Waitaha, Makino, and Tuwharetoa iwi all have maintained strong coastal connections and all have Hei as a common ancestor39. Hei and his son Waitaha were on the Te Arawa waka. The present day connections of ahi kaa to the coast in the Bay of Plenty start at Mauao and extend to Te Kaokaoroa or Matata, though the ancestral connections go further than those demarcation lines. Although Hei went to join Tamatekapua at Moehau (where both would be finally laid to rest) , Hei’s son, Waitaha, had remained on the coast, settling in the Tauranga area and it is with the Bay of Plenty coastal area that Waitaha Iwi is largely associated40.
Hei is the tupuna of both Makino and the Waitaha people here. We live over that side, they live over this side. So we have a very close link that actually goes right along the coastline from Otamarakau up through to Maketu up through.... to Mauao, Mt. Maunganui41
Mrs Sykes likewise stressed that Ngati Makino’s principal link was to Waitaha, placing emphasis on the descent from Hei, which Waitaha and Ngati Makino share42 The foremost coastal Iwi version of the ancestral whakapapa connections has Hei’s son Waitaha at the fore. Waitaha’s granddaughter, Te Hahuru, married Mawaketaupo, the grandson of Ngatoroirangi, and gave birth to their son, Tuwharetoa at Otamarakau where Waitaha and his descendants lived at the time. Tuwharetoa represents the predominant male descendant line of Ngatoroirangi. Otamarakau is the centre of Ngati Makino nationhood. These connections demonstrate an enduring ancient and intertwined relationship of these Iwi with each other and along the Te Arawa coast and the Moana o Te Arawa43 which has endured up to the present. At the time of the Ngaiterangi assertion of dominance along the coast, Waitaha descendants had established kainga all along the Bay of Plenty coast and islands, including Tauranga, Mauao and Motiti Island. Ngatoroirangi whose whakapapa leaned towards Tainui, made the choice to stay with his Te Arawa cousins. This explains why he was with Waitaha-‐a-‐Hei whanau at Motiti as Kahotea’s report refers. Under the RMA, the term “ancestral” is recognised as land that people were connected to or had mana whenua over in the past and do not necessarily still occupy44 or own. The issue of mana moana (mana over the seas) re-‐emerged with the settlement of the Maori Fisheries claim to the Waitangi Tribunal. The Foreshore and Seabed debate resurrected the issue of Maori rights over the coast and seas: the Marine and Coastal area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 is still to be tested and/or case law established. The MFE Maori Values supplement says that The Environment Court has interpreted
39 ditto 40 Chapter 2, WAI 1200 Report Nga tangata whenua: the People of the Central North Island page 20 41 Chapter 2, WAI 1200 Report Nga tangata whenua: the People of the Central North Island page 30, N. Nepia 42 Chapter 2, WAI 1200 Report Nga tangata whenua: the People of the Central North Island page 30, H. Sykes 43 T.Mc Causland, Tukotahi workshop 44 … previous decisions on the meaning of ancestral land were specifically overturned by the High Court in a judgment given in March 1987, Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Inc v W A Habgood Ltd, High Court, Wellington, M655/86, 31 March 1987. It is now clear that it is the relationship that Maori have with any particular land, and the manner in which any development may affect it, that is important, not the historical accidents that have given rise to the current legal tenure”. Cited in Report of The Waitangi Tribunal On The Mangonui Sewerage Claim (Wai-‐17) August 1988
13
‘mana moana’ to mean “authority over the sea”45 and as “the authority, the prestige and the dominion over … waters”.46 Notwithstanding the ancestral connections, all Te Arawa have interests at the coast and, with Maketu in particular. Maketu represents the genesis of the Te Arawa nation and Otaiiti is a part of that. The Cultural values report47 refers to this and cements the Te Arawa presence. The literature review was driven as much by the working group trying to justify in our minds that a logical approach was called for as part of planning for restoring the mauri of the environment. So the literature review became a tool for our kaitiakitanga as well. The most dominant response of the many Te Arawa hui held about the Rena, in the early stages was “why are we even thinking about it, get rid of the Rena wreck!” The Kua Mamae report had indicated that a year after the event, Te Arawa people were still emotionally affected by the disaster. The report identified information on the impacts on indigenous peoples arising from the Exxon oil spill in Alaska, which concluded that the psychological effects from environmental disasters had a greater and more lasting impact on natives than any other section of the population48. The passionate reactions about insisting that the wreck be removed were not a surprise. The Mauri workshops assisted in an acceptance that the resource consent to leave the wreck on the Otaiiti needed to be addressed rationally, including the cultural impact report.
4.1 Determining which values should be assessed: We support the explanation in the NZ Law Commission Study Paper 9 which looks at Maori values in law:
It is considered that there are a number of central values that underpin the totality of tikanga Mäori. They include: whanaungatanga; mana; tapu; utu; and kaitiakitanga. These values in no way form a definitive list. Each tribal grouping will have its own variation of each of these values. Some will also have slightly different ideas as to which values inform tikanga Mäori.49
45 Huataki Holdings Limited v Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries M39/94 and M40/94 (HC), at page 3. cited on page 270 of Good Decisions Workbook ME 679 Maori values supplement (2010) Atkins Holm Joseph Majurey Limited,for the Ministry for the Environmenthe Environment. 46 Huataki Holdings Limited v Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries M39/94 and M40/94 (HC), at page 3. cited on page 270 of Good Decisions Workbook ME 679 Maori values supplement (2010) Atkins Holm Joseph Majurey Limited,for the Ministry for the Environmenthe Environment 47 Pia Bennett 48 See for e.g. Palinkas et al. (1992) The results of these authors suggested that cultural differences played an important role in the perception of the psychological damage produced by this disaster... These results emphasize the role of cultural differences in the perception of and capacity to overcome the psychological impact See also:
• p292 Ethnic differences in stress, coping, and depressive symptoms after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Palinkas, Lawrence A.; Russell, John; Downs, Michael A.; Petterson, John S.
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, Vol 180(5), May 1992, 287-‐295. doi: • See also Palinkas et al (1993) Community Patterns of Psychiatric Disorders after the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill.
American Journal of Psychiatry. 150:10, October 1993 • See also: Francisco Aguilera,a,b,c Josefina Méndez,b Eduardo Pásaroa and Blanca Laffona* Journal of Applied
Toxicology 2010; 30: 291–301 49 Maori Customs and Values in New Zealand Law (2001) Study Paper 9. NZ Law Commission. Wellington p28-‐29
14
The Oceans Policy Working paper50 was referred to in the WAI 95351 as evidence that the Crown has known about Maori values in relation to the sea, and refers to the following values:
• kaitiakitanga – the obligation of whanau, hapu and iwi to protect the physical and spiritual well-‐being of taonga (things of value) within their mana (control)
• mana – authority which, when manifested in spiritual authority, is referred to as mana atua. When derived through birth right it is referred to as mana tipuna. When derived through sheer personality, leadership qualities or achievements it is referred to as mana tangata. In reference to the marine environment, it denotes the authority for the exercise of the stewardship obligation as deriving from atua, ancestors and confirmed by the Treaty of Waitangi
• manaakitanga – an obligation to provide guests with care and kindness in the knowledge that some day that care and kindness will be reciprocated
• mauri – the life force and unique personality of all things animate or inanimate. It is a divine force that in the creation process entered into the realm of atua giving them a life force. In Te Ao Turoa (the natural world), mauri binds all things to their spiritual source in atua. A key consideration of resource management practices (tikanga) is the maintenance and protection of mauri
• noa – to be free or made free from the restrictions associated with tapu
• rahui – a form of tapu set up over a resource (for a period of time) by a hapu or its chief for spiritual, social or economic reasons
• tapu – the mana of atua (gods). Things that are tapu or made tapu are perceived as having the investiture of the atua
• tino rangitiratanga – the exclusive control of tribal taonga (all those things important, both tangible and intangible) for the benefit of the tribe, including those living and those yet to be born
• utu – a general principle that for every thing gifted another of at least equal value should be returned. Utu also denotes reciprocity between the living and the departed. In traditional Maori terms, mana is not achieved through acquisition of material but rather by distributing wealth to others. It is through the ritual gift distributions that reciprocal obligations are established and balance achieved
• whakapapa – (genealogy) transcends the Maori world and evidences the relatedness (the whanaungatanga) of all things. For Maori, whakapapa demonstrates the linkages between the transcendental realm of Te Kore, Te Po (the world of the night) where atua and ancestors dwell and the material-‐physical world of Te Ao Marama (the world of light or the natural world)
• whanaungatanga – denotes the view that, in the Maori world, relationships are everything. From the Maori perspective, humans are not considered superior, but an equal part of life in the natural world.52
50 OCEANS POLICY SECRETARIAT (2003). Maori and Oceans Policy: Working Paper Three. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment. Para 11-‐12, pages 3 & 4 51 Waitangi Tribunal (2002). Ahu Moana WAI 953 The Aquaculture and Marine Farming Report. Wellington: Ministry of Justice.p58 52 OCEANS POLICY SECRETARIAT (2003). Maori and Oceans Policy: Working Paper Three. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment. Para 11-‐12, pages 3 & 4
15
We have no dispute with these values being applicable to the sea and in particular the Otaiiti situation and the explanations are compatible with a Te Arawa perspective. It is a significant point that in both the Mauri and the Tukotahi workshops53, the attendees, without benefit of the preceding report, also offered most of those values as being associated with Otaiiti viz:
• Otaiiti tapu. • Mauri • Mana whenua/Mana moana/Mana tangata • Maketu landing place, start of the Te Arawa nation, identity • Motiti – tapu, history, kaitiakitanga, whakapapa • Tangaroa, Children of Tangaroa – whale, ika, customary fisheries, Tawhirimatea • Ngatoroirangi, esoteric and environmental knowledge • Kaitiakitanga obligations • Matauranga Maori – IK Knowledge • Relationships within Te Arawa, ahi kaa and with other Iwi. • Kai moana safety • Issues around the wreck and damage to Otaiiti from removal • Crown the ngangara • An accident • Beca have not helped the process • Accumulated impacts on Maketu • Pakiwaitara
Noa, rahui, and utu values were not put forward or discussed until the workshop of 2nd November 2013, when the writers were seeking a final recommendation with regard to the resource consent viz.
• Tapu, Mauri, Mana, • Rangatiratanga, identity, tikanga • Kaitiakitanga • Whanaungatanga, whakapapa, ahi kaa • Matauranga Maori – IK Knowledge • Kai moana safety • Utu and Muru tikanga • Treaty relationships • Customary fishing • Seacape icon • Rahui, Noa, Muru
When defining Te Arawa cultural values in relation to the Moana a Kiwa and Otaiiti, the values which are assessed for the effects of the Rena wreck removal consent are listed and explained in the next section. There are many slight variations proffered by respected commentators54 on what values are significant in defining contemporary Maori society, however we are saying that the selections presented here are the ones that need assessing for the purposes of a Te Arawa ki Tai perspective and the explanations concur with our knowledge of their application.
53 October 2013 54 See Ahumoana, The Aquaculture and Marine Farming Report WAI 953 2002 See Joseph, Robert 1999 Maori Customary Laws and Institutions Te Matahauariki Research Institute, University of Waikato See McGinnus, Michael (2012) Ocean Governance: The New Zealand Dimension Emerging Issues Programme Institute of Policy Studies School of Government Victoria University of Wellington p46
16
These values do not exist as separate, contained parts of Te Arawa culture. They are intertwined with each other, an effect on one has an effect on another. Some cannot exist without the other. Though this is a Te Arawa perspective, in relation to the sea, they present a coastal Te Arawa perspective. Therefore they may demonstrate slight differences in explanations in respect of Lakes based Te Arawa Iwi and hapu knowledges or the tikanga around forests. Given the very different environments, and the many iwi and hapu who constitute Te Arawa, this is not surprising. Further, there maybe differences between individual Te Arawa. Neither should that be a surprise given the effects of long-‐standing assimilation policies on the whanau and hapu of Te Arawa. What we have based our explanations on is the application of tikanga in addressing these values. That is, on the practical level, rather than the theoretical. Where possible we have included applied examples. The source of this tikanga is not forgotten but not seen as needing to be explored for the purposes of this report.
All the values have been subsequently amalgamated and arranged in groups as follows for the purpose of this report. 1. Kaitiakitanga, accumulated impacts, kai moana safety 2. Tikanga, rangatiratanga, whanaungatanga, whakapapa, ahi kaa, identity (seascape icon) 3. Tapu, Mana, Ngatoroirangi, esoteric and environmental knowledge 4. Customary fisheries, pakiwaitara, indigenous knowledge, Matauranga maori. 5. Mauri, 6. Noa, Utu, Muru, Rahui
17
Section 5: Explanation of values and the impacts
5.1 Kaitaikaitanga Kaitiakitanga is the over-‐arching issue in determining the impact on Te Arawa cultural values with regard to the Rena wreck on Otaiiti. The Wai 953 report acknowledged the codes that kaitiakitanga embraces e.g. From the world view of Maori it is difficult to divorce kaitiakitanga from mana, which provides the authority for the exercise of the stewardship obligation; or tapu, which acknowledges the special or sacred character of all things and hence the need to protect the spiritual well-‐being of those resources subject to tribal mana; or mauri, which recognises that all things have a life force and personality of their own. It is from the ethic of kaitiakitanga that the traditional mechanism of rahui comes55. The report says that anyone with “mana must exercise it in accordance with the values of kaitiakitanga-‐ to act unselfishly, with the right mind and heart and with proper procedure”. The Maori values supplement56 appropriately classes kaitiakitanga as an intergenerational responsibility “inherited at birth”: The purpose of kaitiakitanga is not only about protecting the life supporting capacity of resources, but of fulfilling spiritual and inherited responsibilities to the environment, of maintaining mana over those resources and of ensuring the welfare of the people those resources support.57 Included in kaitiakitanga are concepts concerning authority and the use of resources (rangätiratanga, mana whenua), spiritual beliefs ascertaining to sacredness, prohibition, energy and life-‐force (tapu, rähui, hihiri, and mauri) and social protocols associated with respect, reciprocity, and obligation (manäki, tuku and utu).58 Page 17 of the WAI 262 report refers to kaitiakitanga and its connectedness and provides a description linking mana with kaitiakitanga, as does the Maori values supplement. In the RMA context, Mäori have conveyed to decision-‐makers that their ability to fulfil their responsibilities can affect their mana. For example, mana would be diminished if an activity despoiled the environment over which they exercise kaitiakitanga.59 Mana and kaitiakitanga go together as right and responsibility and that kaitiakitanga responsibility can be understood not only as a cultural principle but as a system of law. 60 The WAI 953 report also noted that kaitiakitanga included being able to pass down and enhance traditional knowledge: 55 Waitangi Tribunal (2002). Ahu Moana WAI 953 The Aquaculture and Marine Farming Report. Page 58 56 Ministry for the Environment (2010) Maori values supplement: A supplement for the Making Good Decisions Workbook MFE 679 , Wellington 57 (Miller, 2005, p 6): cited Page 270 Ministry for the Environment (2010) Maori values supplement: A supplement for the Making Good Decisions Workbook MFE 679, Wellington. 58 Ministry for the Environment (2010) Maori values supplement: A supplement for the Making Good Decisions Workbook MFE 679, Wellington. Page 271 59 Ministry for the Environment (2010) Maori values supplement: A supplement for the Making Good Decisions Workbook MFE 679 , Wellington Page 270 60 Waitangi Tribunal (2011). Ko Aotearoa Tenei WAI 262: Te Taumata Tuatahi.page 17
18
Kaitiakitanga means more than just mere guardianship. It is the intergenerational responsibility inherited at birth to care for the environment, which is passed down from generation to generation. The purpose of kaitiakitanga is not only about protecting the life supporting capacity of resources, but of fulfilling spiritual and inherited responsibilities to the environment, of maintaining mana over those resources and of ensuring the welfare of the people those resources support. Kaitiakitanga is the key means by which sustainability is achieved61
The Working Group agree with these kaitiakitanga principles. There is much evidence to support that the Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Cleanup and Recovery Committee’s demonstrated kaitiakitanga as per the above and this report itself reflects that ongoing adherence to kaitiakitanga principles as well as demonstrating again our kaitiakitanga. One of the ahi kaa kaitiaki gave this as the reason for cleaning the oil off the Te Arawa beach:
... I was unwilling to let others take charge of our beaches because I did not trust them to clean them up as we wanted. We ahi kaa took charge and the result was a well-‐run operation and we did not use any harsh chemicals or scrapers. I think we did OK. I saw all the old ahi kaa families attend, day after day. That is kaitiakitanga62.
The quotes from the MFE Maori values supplement are apt in the Rena situation though the Ministry for the Environment as owner of the report have been reticent in recognising Te Arawa ki Tai in the Rena clean up and Recovery phase and willing to allow us to be subsumed by a group who had no authority over us or our moana. Secondly, that group was willing for that to happen. Thirdly, Councils have also been parties to the under-‐mining of our status and continue to do so. Ahi kaa kaitiaki did feel aggrieved at the loss of control and therefore fullest expression of kaitiakitanga over their own beaches which was assumed by strangers e.g. Tauranga City Council, Maritime NZ, MFE and Te Moana o Toi leaders forum (Tauranga iwi), Western Bay District Council and the many other Crown agencies. You know that they sent Maori who weren’t Te Arawa to check our beaches? Do you think that was tikanga? The people who were appointed by others. Both other Maori and Pakeha thought that they could rule us. It was a challenge to our mana. Our rangatiratanga63. People were leading the crisis without any environmental knowledge, no evidence of kaitiakitanga or who had mana over our beaches. Without our authority, Maritime NZ, and other Crown agencies, assumed powers which it is questionable under the Treaty whether they had any right to so. That they deferred their Treaty responsibilities to “Treaty partners” aka Moana o Toi Iwi Leaders and continue to do so, that they decided on and continue to support that process64 was/is a clear abuse of the Treaty and thus our mana, rangatiratanga and kaitiakitanga.
61 Maori values supplement MFE p271 62 Kua mamae interviews 63 Kua mamae interviews 64 For e.g. the appointment of a Moana o Toi Iwi Leaders representative to the MSC fund allocation Committee without any proof of whether that group even existed.
19
5.1.1 Impacts on kaitiakitanga: Consultation undertaken by the Rena owners with Te Arawa ki Tai, over the proposed resource consent is consistent with Treaty principles. Te Arawa ki Tai have kaitiaki responsibilities over Otaiiti and the Moananui a Kiwa and exclusive kaitiakitanga over Te Moana o Te Arawa. Members of the working party, have a history of continuous kaitiakitanga as has been referred to in the introduction. The recognition by the owners of our mana and rangatiratanga has been an important component of the present consultation process. The question going forward is, given the Rena owners preference to leave the Rena wreck on the reef, what are the possible impacts on our kaitiakitanga? The fact is that the preceding events around the oil clean up seem to have been enculturalised by the various agencies and thus could influence and affect our kaitiakitanga in the matter of the resource consent and resource consent conditions. The working group is not willing to have compromise kaitiakitanga into the future, including issues with respect to the resource consent. Another concern, linked to the issue above, identified as a possible impact on our kaitiakitanga is the long-‐term governance and management of Otaiiti. Te Arawa are willing to confront any challenge to our right to “co-‐govern” Otaiiti going forward. To use a tikanga pakeha term, we can prove “ownership”. The “beads” that have been washed up as debris on our beaches and continue to do so is another issue for our kaitiakitanga that needs to be resolved. Our kaitiakitanga principles demand the highest standard of cleanliness possible. This has not been achieved with regard to the beads pollution and there is no evidence to date that the beads is not going to be ahn ongoing issue. With the beads issue is the possibility that these beads are getting into the food chain. It also goes without saying that with kaitiakitanga includes the care of the people and our people need to be re-‐assured that there is no pollution of any sort affecting the food chain. There are lingering doubts over the safety of kaimoana. Are or will all possible pollutants be removed? The report Desktop Assessment on the Effects of The MV Rena Recovery operations on Marine mammals refers to noise from the wreck removal disturbing whale sonar fields. We agree and while we do not follow a “green” perspective with regard to whales, we do challenge any uncalled for and unjustified disturbances and probable death to whales or any sea dwellers. The ongoing interference through noise pollution cannot be justified.65 The working group involvement, as kaitaki, has also been consistent in upholding matauranga Maori, tikanga, protection of our people and to maintaining good relationships with the environment. Our involvement since November 5th 2011 so demonstrates.66
There is no doubt that kaitiakitanga has been compromised up till this point. The debacle generated by MFE, Beca and Maritime NZ over the Mauri assessment boat trip was a clear interference with our kaitiakitanga as was the take-‐over by the “Te Moana o Toi leaders.” In dealing with the wreck removal, kaitiakitanga is being exercised by ahi kaa of Te Arawa takutai within the “working group” umbrella. Kaitiakitanga is represented actively in the recommendation at the end of the report and need not be further compromised if the recommendation is upheld. In fact it will be enhanced if the recommendations are followed through with.
65 Desktop Assessment on the Effects of The MV Rena Recovery operations on Marine mammals. 66 See introduction (1st section)
20
Consequently the working group recommend a variety of measures some of which arise from the historical negative impacts which we do not want to continue into any future scenarios as a result of leaving the wreck on the reef.
5.2 Tikanga, rangatiratanga, whanaungatanga, whakapapa, ahi kaa, identity There has been a persistent claim to the ownership of the seas from Maori. In 1955 Nga Puhi elders lodged an application with the Maori Land Court for title to Te Moana-‐nui-‐a-‐ Kiwa, the Pacific Ocean. This was reported to have been a successor to an earlier pre-‐war a pre-‐war petition to Parliament but not acted upon67. The Muriwhenua Report re-‐inforced that position viz that Maori saw the sea as one expansive whole and their right to it was based on ancestral associations. The Pacific was called Te Moananui-‐a-‐Kiwa68 and all Polynesians who relate to Kiwa are entitled to be there. In the Ngai Tahu Sea Fisheries Report 1992, the [Waitangi Tribunal] Tribunal found that: Tribal territories were generally well defined and acknowledged between tribes. Each tribe had complete dominion over the land and foreshore– mana whenua– and over such part of the sea as they exercised mana moana.69 The Tribunal translated mana moana as ‘authority over the seas’. The precise extent of this
authority might vary in different areas, but it was undoubtedly strongest in inshore areas.70
We note that the Maori comprehension of taonga such as rivers, waterways, lakes, lagoons, harbours, bays, and oceans has been covered in detail in a number ofTribunal reports. It is clear that such resources are often highly significant to Maori wellbeing and ways of life. The relationship exists beyond mere ownership, use, or exclusive possession; it concerns personal and tribal identity, Maori authority and control, and the right to continuous access, subject to Maori cultural preferences.71 The reference to the Moana o Te Arawa refers to the view of kaumatua that the taka, Otaiiti, defines the waters of Te Arawa coast and likens Otaiiti to the coral reefs which surround other Polynesian Islands. It is believed that Ngatoroirangi drew this analogy from Hawaiiki and was demarcing the inner waters of the Bay like the inner waters of a coral reef that surround many Polynesian islands. At the point of Otaiiti the deeper waters of Moananui o Kiwa72 are distinguished from the calmer inner coastal waters73. Otaiiti is the gateway to the Moana o Te Arawa, “Te Tau O taiti”74. Otaiiti is a Te Arawa cultural icon, an important part of defining who were are. In this sense Maori culture as we know it today is a creation of its environment. It retains many aspects of its Hawaikian roots, but the elements that make it distinctive in the world can be traced to the relationships kaitiaki built up with the land, water, flora and fauna of this place. 67 (64 JPS (1955) 162, NZ Herald 24 February 1955 68 Te Moananui-‐A-‐Kiwa is the Te Arawa name for the seas including the Bay of Plenty. Makareti p138 Tame McCausland Workshop 24.10.13 69 Waitangi Tribunal, The Fisheries Settlement Report 1992 (Wellington: Brooker and Friend Ltd, 1992), p 18 70 Waitangi Tribunal, The Fisheries Settlement Report 1992 (Wellington: Brooker and Friend Ltd, 1992), p 18 71 Waitangi Tribunal (2002). Ahu Moana WAI 953 The Aquaculture and Marine Farming Report. Wellington: Ministry of Justice.p57 72 Tame McCausland Tukotahi Workshop 24.10.13 73 Tame McCausland ditto and Interviews with 3 kaumatua at Makino office (transcript) 74 Transcripts of kaumatua hui
21
In this way, the mauri, or inner well-‐being of land and water spaces and the whakapapa of flora and fauna do not serve to articulate the human relationships with these things; they are the building blocks of an entire world view and of Maori identity itself.75
There is no doubt that tikanga, rangatiratanga, whanaungatanga, whakapapa, ahi kaa, identity have been affected by the grounding and subsequent clean up and recovery events. Social disruption issues which were minimal in the oil clean-‐up phase, grew during the Recovery phase now have the potential to be exacerbated by the Resource Consent and Environment court case. As workshop attendees pointed out, the Crown is the “ngangara” in this case and their controls have usurped tikanga and identity in particular. Ahi kaa, whanaungatanga and whakapapa need to be taken into consideration so as to minimise impacts. Ahi kaa principles should not be compromised by the owners and the Crown insisting on a waka wide consensus for Te Arawa, to facilitate the resource consent court process. In contrast, whanaungatanga has been strengthened. Makino and Waitaha have strengthened their relationships as have the Pikiao and Tuwharetoa linkages. The Te Arawa nation identity is in the landscape/seascape markers and associated pakiwaitara (stories). Otaiiti is such an icon. Leaving the wreck, especially at the tihi (summit), is a serious impact. Some mitigation measures discussed included ability to improve customary knowledge and growth of that knowledge as a way of addressing impacts on identity. Co-‐governance of Otaiiti is also a necessity as a protection to identity. It is suggested that rangatiratanga can also be exercised in this situation by simply acting like rangatira and following tikanga provided that both are allowed to function. A recommendation being that a tikanga process be instituted by the working group meeting with the owners themselves to resolve the impacts and avoid further Crown processes like the Environment Court.
5.3 Tapu and Mana: Otaiiti is tapu. This is a consistent declaration by Te Arawa ki Tai and has been re-‐confirmed “time and time again” by kaumatua76 Tame McCausland and Te Ariki Morehu. Tapu has many dimensions and many theorists have tried to define these. In contrast, Makareti’s writings in “the Old Time Maori” make several references to her experiences of tapu in everyday life; that is, as practised, not as theory. It is a state that is quite special and covered many aspects of her life both at home and abroad. For example, she left instructions that genealogies presented in her writings were not to be discussed in a room with food. This is not unlike evidence given in an affidavit in support of the Te Arawa fisheries case:
Dad was a carver. He never mixed his koha money with money made from whitebait. The carving money was kept separate. When he was dying he gave it to me and said don’t buy food with it. He said use it to pay for his funeral expenses.77
75 Waitangi Tribunal (2011). Ko Aotearoa Tenei WAI 262: Te Taumata Tuatahi.page 115-‐116 76 Tukotahi workshop 77 Affadavit R. Bennett No CP 122SW1999 IN THE MATTER of The Judicature Amendment Act 1972; Declaratory Judgments Act 1908; the Maori Fisheries Act 1989 and the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 BETWEEN TE KOTAHITANGA 0 TE ARAWA WAKA TRUST BOARD ...
22
“Tapu” has a significant role in all aspects of being Maori. Tapu sets the benchmark for proper behaviour; rules that people aspire to conduct themselves by. Tapu requires the individual to obey a rule or risk the consequences. Makareti refers for example: “Sometimes of course a child is born dead. This would mean that the mother had broken some law of tapu, or it might be a case of makutu (witchcraft) “78. In regards to fishing she concurs with the affidavit where she says:
The men who went on fishing expeditions had no food before they went, and none until after their return, when the tapu was taken off by a Tohunga. Tapu entered into all that they did, as atua were watching over them close at hand in all their work at fishing, and the success of their venture depended on their observing strict rules of tapu.79
In its most simplistic terms, ‘tapu’ might be referred to as “demanding utmost respect”. Hinatore confirms:80
Mana and tapu are fundamental concepts that governed the infrastructure of traditional Mäori society. Mana and tapu are inherited from the käwai tïpuna and all natural resources within Te Ao Mäori possess mana and tapu to varying degrees.
Tapu acts as a corrective and coherent power within Mäori society. It acted in the same way as a legal system operated with a system of prohibitory controls, effectively acting as a protective device. Everyone was required to protect their own tapu and respect the tapu of others.
The tapu of Otaiiti has various dimensions. One is as a creation of the Atua, that is ‘intrinsic’ tapu associated with the mana of having been created by the gods (kawaii tipuna) and they situating it where it is as part of the Taiao or natural environment; its position as the entrance to the moana o Te Arawa. Another dimension of the tapu of Otaiiti arises from its association with the revered and tapu tohunga, Ngatoroirangi. The tapu nature of Otaiiti is the critical cultural value to be assessed in this report. Ngatoroirangi was the high priest whose mana was sought to navigate the Te Arawa waka. His knowledge was learned in whare wananga at Taputapuatea, highly respected and feared. “No Te Arawa au, no Ngatoroirangi upoko kaiora”. Tapu knowledge to the depth and breadth that Ngatoroirangi possessed was demonstrated through his feats, his navigational skills involving as they did reading the signs in the environment including astronomical science and in Aotearoa most well-‐known through the geothermal resource creation and knowledge. This knowledge of the skies, sea, land and water, was tapu. Makareti refers “The Tohunga, the learned and tapu chief, was Ngatoroirangi”81. His mana is still respected in present times by Te Arawa. Recently a Maketu tangata whenua has said, “I don’t gather kaimoana or fish in Wairere waters [at southern end of Motiti] it is too spooky, [because of Ngatoroirangi], you can feel it”82. That is an example of recent observance of tapu. These special gifts of Ngatoroirangi were demonstrated in the often quoted battle Maikukutea, where he defeated Manaia’s army by bringing forth the storms which destroyed them on Motiti Island. In this endeavour he was assisted by his wife, Kearoa who was a tohunga in her own right. 78 Makereti (1938). The Old-‐Time Maori. Auckland: New Womens Press Ltd. page 76 79 Makereti (1938). The Old-‐Time Maori. Auckland: New Womens Press Ltd. page 138 80 Ministry of Justice (2013, November 6). He Hïnätore ki te Ao Mäori: A Glimpse into the Mäori World. Wellington: Ministry of Justice. Page 1 81 Makereti (1938). The Old-‐Time Maori. Auckland: New Womens Press Ltd. page 33 82 Interview LK Customary fisheries report interviews
23
A well-‐known waiata of Te Arawa refers to this battle signifying his fame and shows how the memory of him remains in the psyche of Te Arawa83 The respect for Ngatoroirangi was a compelling reason for ensuring the Ongatoro beach was cleaned up to highest standards so as to recognise his mana and have his approval. I hope that they [ancestors] would think we did the best we could under the circumstances. I
know I kept them to the front of my mind. Ngatoroirangi, my koro and kuia, Aunty Pia. They were there inspiring and strengthening our resolve. I hope our actions honoured them84.
This recent example highlights the principles set by tikanga which kaitiaki aspire to follow even in the modern context. Ngatoroirangi sets the highest standard for appropriate behaviour and actions when delivering on kaitiaki obligations and these drove the work of some of the participants in the Rena clean up and recovery phase in Maketu. The tikanga of tapu can be wholly dependant on the individual’s commitment to uphold. That is, there will be occasions where restrictions from tapu cannot be monitored by the community and the individual could, if he/she decided, break tapu without being seen. Nonetheless , as Hinatore says:
They would not violate the tapu for fear of sickness or catastrophe which would follow as a result of the anger of the käwai tïpuna. When the tapu of an individual is violated, or when an individual violates a tapu, the consequences can be psychologically manifested.85
This is how tapu still operates today. An individual would not break a tapu for fear of the consequences. These consequences might not affect the offender but may afflict a close family member or even their children or even a whole community. The breaking of tapu involves a retribution of some sort. Hinatore again:
If a stranger breached the tapu area or thing, the community would be compelled to exact utu from, or even kill, the intruder. This requirement would ensure that the käwai tïpuna did not take retribution against the community for the unrequited affront.86
In its strictest sense then, to avoid the wrath generated by the disrespect of the tapu of Otaiiti, Te Arawa are compelled to seek a resolution of the wrong-‐doing or else risk retribution being taken out on its community. The violation of the tapu of Otaiiti in relation to the Rena accident is a serious offence involving as it does the mana and tapu of kawaii tupuna and Ngatoroirangi and the taka. It is also the reason that the resolution of the wreck removal needs to follow a tikanga process for decision making so that issues of tapu can be properly resolved. It has to be done right. Dealing with the tapu nature of Otaiiti needs to be done with the utmost integrity so as to protect the people from any consequences arising from the breach of tapu. As has been referred earlier, the tapu is intrinsic as well as being derived from the mana of Ngatoroirangi. The tikanga must be appropriate and to a high standard.
Breaches of tapu invited mental suffering and physical consequences such as disease, even death….thus tapu was not just a means of discouraging rule-‐breakers, but also a
83 See page 17 Maketu (Te Arawa) Cultural Values Assessment Rena Wreck Removal 84 See Kua Mamae interviews 85 Ministry of Justice (2013, November 6). He Hïnätore ki te Ao Mäori: A Glimpse into the Mäori World. Wellington: Ministry of Justice. Page 61 86 Ministry of Justice (2013, November 6). He Hïnätore ki te Ao Mäori: A Glimpse into the Mäori World. Wellington: Ministry of Justice. Page 61
24
preventative measure that stopped people becoming sick or otherwise safe-‐guarded the community’s interest.87
One of the interviewees for Kua mamae offered the following as a resolution: In koros time the tohunga would know what to do – special magic they had-‐ don’t know who they are these days with oil – still some around -‐ those people88. The mauri assessment model has been a useful tool in seeking a “tika” resolution. There were real concerns arising from tapu expressed by members of the working group. The suggestions of diverting money from the wreck removal towards community projects may influence the community’s or working groups decisions over the resource consent which could become a breach of tapu. The working group’s view was that it may offend the ancestor to talk about money in relation to his mana and consequently bring a calamity on individuals, their whanau or the community. A tikanga process was essential for resolving the issues. Because of the erosion of tikanga values in general, there will be Maori who would have little conscience in “going for the money” was the consensus. This was also a possible consequential scenario should Beca or Councils interfere in the resolution process. The working group saw this approach as part of the process that Council’s and the Crown use, “divide and rule”, “to get their way”. Further, as has been inferred, the breakdown of tapu through imposition of Pakeha law, Christianity, and assimilation policies, has had massive consequences on Maori society, most easily reflected in prison statistics. Te Arawa are resisting further erosion of our culture through diminishing of values which are essential to a functional Maori community. Tapu is such a value.
5.3.1 Impacts to tapu: In the Whariki independent Underwater Dive Assessment report, the following impacts of the wreck on Otaiiti are specifically noted for this section of the cultural impact report89:
The force of the collision associated with the grounding of the Rena has embedded the bow into the reef by approximately 40 meters. The majority of the bow is currently being removed..
The 11,000 tonne stern section is fully submerged and resting at a 55-‐60 degrees list on the reef. The deepest part is lying in 65 metres of water; the forward part of the stern section lies in 23 metres of water; with the top of the accommodation block 10 metres beneath the surface.
The exterior of the accommodation block is substantially intact. Internally, the walls between cabins have collapsed. The hold covers have broken away from the hull and much of the cargo has spilled into the debris field. Inside the hull the tangle of debris makes it difficult to determine what cargo remains in the lower holds.
87 Waitangi Tribunal (2012). Ko Aotearoa Tenei WAI 262: Te Taumata Tuarua, Chapter 7 Rongoa Maori. Wellington: Ministry of Justice. Page 603 (online version) 88 Kuia, Kua mamae interview 2011 89 see para 25,26,27 Te Kowhai, J.(2013) Underwater Dive Assessment, Whariki Developments Ltd. (Draft as at 27 August 2013)
25
and taking into account the information in the same report on damages from wreck removal methods, the essential issue in terms of impacts on the tapu of Otaiiti, can be reduced to having to choose between three options: 1. Leave the wreck on Otaiiti 2. Leave part of the wreck. 3. Leave none of the wreck It follows then that the essential question is: Which of these options then will have the least negative impact on Otaiiti and its tapu and the mana and tapu of Ngatoroirangi. The potential negative effects are: 4. Further disrespect to Otaiiti through damage from removal methods. 5. Further ongoing disrespect to Ngatoroirangi through damage to the taka from wreck removal methods 6. Further erosion of the cultural value of tapu according to Te Arawa tikanga, through having to frame it in a RMA process and through loss of rangatiratanga 7. Further erosion of Ngatoroirangi’s knowledge, esoteric and scientific through dealing with unqualified people, inter-‐tribal puhaehae, pakeha and council processes on resolving Rena issues. Providing for western knowledges, sciences and values as of right over matauranga Maori. 8. Further erosion of indigenous knowledges of the ahi kaa of the coast through deferring to majority of Te Arawa ki uta so that Beca can satisfy the owners and the Environment Court as to the majority Te Arawa opinion. 8. Negative effects on taiao of non-‐recognition of tapu of atua: These impacts are damaging to the well-‐being of Te Arawa kaitiaki and whanau 9. Obstructions to using tikanga to resolve the tapu nature of the wreck issue e.g. Crown, BECA, Councils, non-‐Te Arawa Iwi, unsupported and unrepresentative Iwi runanga in Maketu, gate-‐keeping the resource consent process 10. Risks to the community through inappropriate restorative actions At the last meeting of the working group, the recommendation was Option 2. The group recognised that there is no method of wreck removal that will remove the full wreck without further damaging Otaiiti. It was judged that further damage to Otaiiti was more disrespectful to Otaiiti and Ngatoroirangi than leaving the wreck there, provided that any debris, or containers or cargo outside the wreck and parts of the wreck that could be removed without anymore damage to Otaiiti should be removed. The working group also surmised that the present wreck removal work has damaged Otaiiti and continues to do so and were unsettled by the fact that the longer the work goes on, the more Otaiiti is damaged. Joe Te Kowhai at the Tukotahi workshop also pointed to the fact that total wreck removal could take up to 20 years. The workshop was also told that Otaiiti was fractured and broken as a result of the original collision. The preference therefore was to let the healing of Otaiiti take
26
place. The working group were of the opinion that a rahui and other rituals would also help the healing process. However, because much of the information rested on the independent diving assessment, the working group also decided that an independent review be undertaken on the dive assessment information to safeguard the interests of the Te Arawa whanau. Addressing the impacts on tapu are decisions that have to be made. The best way has to be adherence to tikanga principles for resolving the impacts on the tapu and mana of Otaiiti and Ngatoroirangi. A kaitiaki, who was disturbed by this recommendation, preferring full wreck removal, has suggested that the consent conditions should also include reviews to see whether new technology for wreck removals has developed to enable wreck removal without damaging Otaiiti further. The Working group endorse this suggestion. The final recommendation at the end of this report seeks to incorporate a tikanga process. Again discussions on resolving impacts were seen as upholding tikanga.
5.4 Customary fisheries, identity, (seascape icon) pakiwaitara, indigenous knowledge, Matauranga maori With Otaiiti, we do not regard it as a regular, everyday “fishing ground” as such, but more traditionally as a place for selective catches and a place which fish needed to shelter, feed, replenish and grow. This knowledge of species and the environment stems from our relationship to the taka. We know that there are choice species grounds nearby which are sustained by Otaiiti. The food brought by the ocean current hits Otaiiti and distributes the kai at a number of levels and depths and breadths, catering for the different fish species and habitats. According to our older fishermen90, its exposed position in the ocean secures its own protection from exploitation and can only be fished with due consideration of the weather conditions. Further pre-‐the quota management system at least, there were sufficient and productive fishing spots closer to shore so there was no need to go out as far as Otaiiti for regular kai gathering purposes. Of particular interest to Te Arawa is Otaiiti’s place as a wharehui for shark. The name Te Arawa is taken from a shark. Sharks figure predominantly when talking about Te Arawa kaitiaki.
Te Arawa is the name of a shark at the place our ancestors came from. That is how the waka got its name. That’s significant in itself. Te Arawa the people in Aotearoa begin at Maketu with the landing of the waka. Our tupuna in 1924 wrote to Apirana Ngata who was a frequent visitor to Maketu. Attached herewith marked A” is a copy of that correspondence. They said amongst other things: Ko enei tahataha ara takutai o te moana he wahi rongo m no matau no te Arawa, a, he unga ma! hoki no to matau tupuna waka (Te Arawa)91
90 Personal com PR 91 Para 4 Affadavit R. Bennett No CP 122SW1999 IN THE MATTER of The Judicature Amendment Act 1972; Declaratory Judgments Act 1908; the Maori Fisheries Act 1989 and the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 BETWEEN TE KOTAHITANGA 0 TE ARAWA WAKA TRUST BOARD ...
27
Te Arawa iwi along the coast have different shark kaitiaki as well as other sea creatures and taniwha. Te Ariki Morehu giving evidence for Ngati Makino in their WAI claims92 referred to two Ngati Makino guardians of coastal resources that take the physical form of a sting-‐ray and a red shark. “These guardians [kaitiaki]came from Hawaiki when the Te Arawa waka journeyed here.93” Shark is also one of the species that is referred to in an affidavit made to support the Te Arawa fisheries claim. Our home was a stink home. Koro would hang the sharks livers up to collect the oil which dripped from it, smelt all over the neighbourhood. The oil was for medicinal purposes and for preserving the wood of the carvings.... 94
When koro caught a mako shark, he said a special karakia for mako sharks as he hauled it in. You had to obey all the signs. Koro lost a finger fishing, his fishing line cut his finger off. We have a photo of our koro with a mako shark he caught on a fishing line. Mako were prized of course for their taonga value also.95
Shark are a species associated with Otaiiti.
5.4.1 Impacts: At he Tokotahi workshop, Joe Te Kowhai speaking to his report, said that the total wreck removal would take years to effect. We do see some serious disturbance to “customary fisheries” if the work for the Rena wreck removal is carried on over a number of years. The values associated with customary fisheries viz: karakia, fishing practices, manaaki, identity, (seascape icon) pakiwaitara, indigenous knowledge, Matauranga maori, require the re-‐establishment of normal relations in regard to the area and the taka. Our indigenous knowledge is reflected in our customary fisheries practices. It is important that our indigenous knowledge be allowed to grow and flourish. The continued denial of access to the taka, though understandable, is detrimental to maintaining and growing our knowledges. It is the working group’s position that because the effects of colonisation have erased much indigenous knowledge that any barriers to its growth must be challenged. The Maketu (Te Arawa) Rena Recovery Committee worked hard to include a Matauranga Maori study alongside the suite of contracts the Ministry for the Environment were establishing as part of the Rena recovery plan. We do not know whether a new equilibrium has to be found due to the continuing interference with the natural world and thus we need to have access on an unfettered basis to monitor the taka and the children of Tangaroa, to fish for food, to monitor sharks and other species, that Otaiiti supports. All these values require that the Te Arawa ahi kaa have a chance as soon as possible to re-‐establish their relationship to this taka. In Te Arawa, rahui are not ad infinitum. The ongoing wreck removal work is not conducive to restoring our relationships to this taka.
92 Wai 275 -‐ Claim filed by Te Ariki Morehu and Neville Nepia on behalf of Ngati Makino Wai 334 -‐ Claim filed by Peretini Nuku Tawa and Awhimate Awhimate on behalf of Ngati Makino Wai 1071 -‐ Claim filed by Te Ariki Morehu on behalf of Ngati Makino Wai 1372 -‐ Claim filed by Te Ariki Morehu on behalf of Ngati Makino 93 Waitangi Tribunal (2007). He Maunga Rongo: Report on Central North Island Claims. Stage one. WAI 1200. page 124 (Pre-‐publication copy) 94 (2005). WAI 676 ONGATORO Evidence of Raewyn Bennett. Para 10 95 (2005). WAI 676 ONGATORO Evidence of Raewyn Bennett.para17
28
5.5 Mauri Makareti refers to mauri as being the “tapu life-‐principle”: ...not only human beings, but everything, such as trees and all plants in the forest, fish, birds, animals, mountains, and rivers, had a mauri or life-‐principle. With human beings it was likened to a soul. The Maori believed that nothing in this earth existed without its mauri, and that if this were violated in any way, its physical foundation was open to peril or exposed to great risk.96 Nin Thomas in her doctoral thesis, posits ‘mauri’ as the value which underpins Maori custom laws by binding all other values, “what was the ultimate purpose of these principles? The answer is – to safeguard the “mauri”.”97 Unfortunately there has been resistance by the Environment Court to assigning “mauri” the recognition it deserves when assessing environmental effects. “Mauri” is seen by the Court’s interpretation of the RMA, as just one of the factors needing balancing in decisions. This approach denies Maori their fullest expression of their environmental ethics. The Maori values supplement refers to Mauri:
Mäori acknowledge the environment, and objects within the environment, as having not only a physical presence, but also as having spiritual and metaphysical values. Every living thing is recognised as having value and as having a mana, wairua and mauri of its own. The spiritual values are as important as the physical, and indeed, Mäori believe that the physical and spiritual aspects of a person or thing are joined by mauri to make a complete whole98
Mauri is not static, and the mauri of any particular thing can be affected by the environment in which it exists. Barlow (1991, p 83) gives an example of how depletion of the food supply (in the oceans, rivers and forests) can result in the mauri or health of that food supply decreasing. He notes that mauri is able to be restored through conservation measures, such as the imposition of rähui, and through the carrying out of rituals/ceremonies. The maintenance of mauri is therefore very important to ensure the wellbeing of the environment as a whole99
Restoring the mauri of the taka and the Moana o Te Arawa is our over-‐arching objective. We place a lot of emphasis on restoring the mauri of Otaiiti. It was through the Te Arawa ki Tai ahi kaa, Pia Bennett, that the term “mauri” was inserted in the MFE Rena recovery plan. The recommendation at the end accommodates and provides for Mauri impacts. Mauri is strongly linked to kaitiakitanga. In this instance kaitiakitanga is the action, mauri is the objective we aspire to. As has been mentioned, the working group through its involvement in Rena mauri workshops lead by Dr Kepa Morgan, have been able to take a less emotional and more rational approach to assessing the mauri of the wreck environment, not solely Otaiiti. Despite this approach, there are not many options available to consider and the wreck positioned at the tihi (summit) of the taka creates great angst amongst every Te Arawa participant in this process.
96 Makareti page 118-‐119 97 nin p83 98 p266 Maori values supplement An appreciation of Mäori spiritual and metaphysical values is not only important as a means to understand mätauranga Mäori, it is also important for RMA decision-‐makers, as these values are cultural beliefs which form part of the cultural and social wellbeing considerations under section 5 of the RMA, and are protected as matters of national importance under section 6(e) of the RMA 99 Maori values supplement p272
29
Dr. Morgan has been progressing workshops on the Mauri of the Rena environment and adapting the modelling as information comes to hand. The last comprehensive assessment in May 2013 showed these results after Dr. Morgan had taken into account all the available BECA literature. The review, which was about all of the Rena environment, not just the wreck and Otaiiti, uses the following indicators and weightings.
ID Indicator Description Weighting Env1 Fish biodiversity 30% Env2 Water Quality Env3 Reef and Seabed Cult1 Sacred and Spiritual 30% Cult2 Traditional Fishery Cult3 Respect/Mana Soc1 Dive site safety 20% Soc2 Recreational fishery Soc3 Perception (Tourism) Economic1 Clean up cost 20% Economic2 Removal cost Economic3 Tourism operations The summary Mauri modelling cultural results as at May 2013 showed:
The analysis compares three different time spans, 2011, 2018 and 2025 within a “Leave the wreck” scenario or “Remove the wreck scenario. ” Referring only to the Cultural section, the analysis as at May 2013 shows the wreck removal as the quickest way in which to restore the Mauri of the Rena environment. This analysis did not take into account the independent underwater assessment which results became available in August 2013. The Mauri analysis showed that nevertheless a natural recovery process showed improvements at a slower rate for leaving the wreck there. Should the cultural indicators used to assess the cultural situation change, the model could produce different results. For example, culturally appropriate mitigation methods may off-‐set the slower recovery. It is recommended that the Maketu (Te Arawa) working group undertake or commission a peer review of the under-‐water dive assessment and look at factoring in the dive assessment into the Mauri modelling as well as any possible mitigation measures, before confirming the final recommendation.
5.6 Utu, noa, muru, rahui Te Hinatore provides an excellent explanation of the concepts of “utu’ and “muru” and these quotes are only snippets. The Working group recommends that readers refer to that document for the appropriate context.
When discussing the nature of muru, there must be reference to the concept of utu from which muru is derived. Utu in its purest form conveys a sense of reciprocity. A muru seeks to redress a transgression with the outcome of returning the affected party back to their original position in an active manner.
Wreck scenario 2011 2018 2025 Remove wreck -‐2 +1.33 +2 Leave wreck -‐2 -‐1.67 -‐1
30
"If a breach of tapu was considered major then there was this muru where my people would go to the offender s people and right the wrong that was done to me..." This is the restorative nature of a muru. The traditional concept of utu pervaded the Maori social, legal, political and economic order. To understand the practice of utu it is necessary to see it as operating within the Maori conceptual system. In cases where utu is sought, the conventions of mana and tapu are necessarily present as utu governed relationships when a breach of tapu occurred or where mana was increased or lost through the actions of an individual or group. Utu was also a reciprocation of kind deeds from one person to another. The degree and form in which utu was applied depended on the circumstances, and varied according to a number of factors including the parties involved and the action or actions of the parties. The response to an action would sometimes require revenge, other times it would be a reward, a transfer of goods or services, or an insulting song. While particular actions deemed that a response was necessary, it was not necessary to apply utu immediately. There would be an appropriate time and place for utu. The utu could be deferred, sometimes for a few generations, but it was not forgotten. The party applying utu was required to restore the balance by responding over time.
In resolving the impacts of the rena wreck removal, the working group wishes to undertake a process outside of the Environment Court. As an assertion of rangatiratanga, using our tikanga for resolving issues is appropriate. In that sense then matters of utu, muru, noa and rahui can be referred to the recommendations for resolution.
31
Section 6: Recommendations
6.1 Summary and Recommendations: In Sections 1 & 2, we highlighted the impacts which arose from denial of our status as a Treaty partner by various authorities which started with the management of the oil clean up. Te Arawa rangatiratanga was compromised. This is not a situation we want to carry on into the resource consent process. We highlighted our kaitiakitanga history including the successful co-‐ordination of the clean-‐up effort as a challenge to any compromising of our rangatiratanga going forward. We also backgrounded the establishment of the Ngati Makino led, Te Arawa working group for the resource consent. In Sections 3 & 4, we explained and identified the values which are impacted by the wreck being on Otaiti. The methodology has included information generated by numerous workshops and hui. We described the emotional difficulty of trying to address the Rena calamity in a rational manner and acknowledged the leadership of Dr. Kepa Morgan’s “Mauri” workshop in assisting us to focus on the issues around the resource consent. We re-‐ emphasised our history of kaitiakitanga of Te Moana o Te Arawa and the takutai. We were also fortunate to have been able to draw on Makareti’s writings as well as He Hinatore in identifying the Te Arawa values which have been compromised by the Rena wreck and the tikanga for going forward, such as Utu, Noa, Muru, Rahui. We also re-‐inforced our ancestral and present ties to the coast. In Section 5 we started our values impact assessment proper by addressing kaitiakitanga. We expressed our kaitiakitanga with respect to the issues around the consent. We raised issues of kaitiakitanga that require resolution in the consideration of the consent. We also included issues of co-‐governance of Otaiti, the beads pollution, kai moana safety, needless interference with marine mammals and maintenance of the values of Matauranga Maori and tikanga. Kaitiakitanga puts onerous responsibilities on kaitiaki not least of which is the responsibility for passing on and enhancing knowledge. We briefly explained issues of tikanga, rangatiratanga, whanaungatanga, whakapapa, ahi kaa, identity which are impacted by the wreck and need to be resolved in the resource consent process. The critical issues of mana and tapu of Otaiti were explained and assessed. A recommendation for resolution was partial removal of the wreck. This recommendation was an interim decision depending on a peer review of the Whariki underwater dive assessment We again assessed impacts on customary fishing arising from leaving or removal of the wreck. The impacts needing resolution have been referred to in previous sections but it is pointed out that to maintain our knowedges, it was important that our normal relationship to Otaiti be restored as soon as possible. Wreck removal processes requiring years of being excluded from this taka is not an option we support. We addressed the critical value of Mauri. We review briefly the concepts of Utu, Muru, Noa and rahui. The actioning of these principles is the resolution process itsself.
32
Drawing on the impacts on Te Arawa values, the Te Arawa working group makes the following recommendations regarding the Rena Owners resource consent intention to leave the wreck on Otaiti :
1. Avoid further diminishing of our kaitiakitanga by recognising and supporting the rangatiratanga of Te Arawa kaitiaki in their kaitiaki relationship with the Crown and other agencies.
2. In good faith, work in a partnership arrangement to strengthen kaitiakitanga going
forward.
3. Recognise and support our ownership of Otaiti and a co-‐governance arrangement going forward.
4. Engage in a tikanga process with the Te Arawa working group representatives to resolve
the identified impacts. These include applying utu, rahui and noa principles and process. 5. Implement the recommendation in tapu as another avenue of recognition for addressing
kaitiakitanga.
33
Appendix A: Maketu (Te Arawa) Hui and Workshops re: Rena Resource Consent
Hui Venue Date Owners apology hui #1 Whakaue marae 27 July 2012 Maketu (Te Arawa) Committee w Beca Maketu Community Centre 22 Aug 2012 Te Arawa ki Tai #1 Whakaue marae 15 Sept 2012 Maketu (Te Arawa) & Beca -‐ update and ongoing discussions
Whakaue marae 02 Nov 2012
Maketu (Te Arawa) iwi reps & JO Whakaue marae 06 Nov 2012 Te Arawa ki Tai #2 Whakaue marae 17 Nov 2012 Mauri Assessment wananga #1 Whakaue marae 17/18 Nov 2012 Maketu reps with Beca rep – update/CVA discussions
Maketu 17 Jan 2013
Otaiiti site visit Mauri assessment #2 Tga Bridge Marina 19 Jan 2013 Site visit debrief Whakaue marae 19 Jan 2013 Handover/present final draft CVA Beca offices 04 Feb 2013 Mauri (Ngatoroirangi) wananga #3 Umutahi marae 16 Feb 2013 Te Arawa working group reps hui with TALT
TALT, Rotorua 25 Feb 2013
Maketu (Te Arawa) working group and Te Arawa ki Tai koeke and others
Whakaue marae 27 Feb 2013
Maketu (Te Arawa) & KZ/JO and others Whakaue marae 27 Feb 2013 Maketu (Te Arawa) working group & Beca rep
Makino offices 14 March 2013
PPT Report from Recovery Committee to Te Arawa Lakes Trust AGM On Rena including advising Resource Consent
Waiteti Marae Ngongotaha, Rotorua
17 March 2013
Meeting at Beca re: progressing Te Arawa UW assessment
Beca offices 28 March 2013
Meeting with Te Arawa ki Tai koeke and Makino reps & advisor
Makino offices 05 April 2013
Meeting with Beca and TMC rep re: progress UW assessment, scope of work and other logistics
Beca 11 April 2013
Maketu (Te Arawa) reps & Beca/Owners reps
Makino offices 16 April 2013
Maketu (Te Arawa) reps with Beca – debris management
Maketu 18 April 2013
Ngati Pikiao hui-‐a-‐iwi – update on Rena Houmaitawhiti marae 26 April 2013 Meeting with Beca Beca office 02 May 2013 Regular meeting with Beca Beca offices 05 May 2013 Technical reports workshop #1 Whakaue marae 13 May 2013 Technical reports workshop #2 Whakaue marae 15 May 2013 Te Arawa working group pre-‐meeting with KZ and team
Makino offices 26 May 2013
Te Arawa ki Tai meeting with KZ & team Whakaue marae 26 May 2013
34
Te Arawa rep & KZ and others Tauranga 28 May 2013 Regular meeting at Beca Beca office 11 June 2013 Mauri wananga #4 Tukotahi marae 16 June 2013 Hui with Rangitihi/Tuwharetoa Maketu 21 June 2013 Maketu (Te Arawa) & Beca team Debris management 28 June 2013 Engagement hui with Beca team Beca offices 02 July 2013 Presentation of mauri model to Beca team Beca offices 11 July 2013 Regular Beca/Te Arawa hui Beca offices 23 July 2013 Maketu (Te Arawa) reps with Beca reps – debris management/CIA outputs
Maketu 07 August 2013
Te Arawa rep with Beca reps – CIA & UW assessments talks
Maketu 16 August 2013
Te Arawa reps with Beca reps – finalise CIA contractual matters/expectations
Makino offices 30 August 2013
Consultation hui with owners and mandated Te Arawa Iwi Authorities
Otamarakau marae 08 Sept 2013
Beca/Owner reps with Te Arawa reps – discuss solutions to Maria Horne’s issues
Makino offices 17 Sept 2013
Te Arawa working group Aurere Law 18 Sept 2013 Kaumatua interviews for CIA Makino offices 20 Sept 2013 Kaumatua interviews for CIA Makino offices 27 Sept 2013 Hui with kaumatua re: Whakaue Makino offices 05 October 2013 Te Ariki hui with Te Wano Maketu 06 Oct 2013 Te Arawa working group Tukotahi marae 10 October 2013 Te Arawa CIA workshop Tukotahi marae 24 October 2013 Te Arawa Iwi Authorities CVA/CIA/UW assessment presentation
Te Puni Kokiri -‐ Rotorua 01 Nov 2013
Te Arawa waka, Te Arawa tangata hui-‐a-‐iwi to present CVA/CIA/UW assessments
Tukotahi marae 02 Nov 2013
Te Arawa assessments update & present summaries
Beca offices 12 Nov 2013
35
Appendix B: He puakanga nā ngā iwi o Te Arawa ki Maketu i pākinongia
1. Nō Maketu, arā, nō te wahapū o Te Awanui o Ngātoroirangi te ūnga whakamutunga o Te Arawa waka. Mai o taua wā, ā, mohoa noa he nui anō ōna whakanekeneke, ā, ka mutu, he nui ngā kōrero tuku iho mō te kāinga nei. Heoi, ko ngā karangatanga iwi e whai pānga ana i roto o Maketu, koia ēnei: ko Ngāti Pikiao, ko Ngāti Whakaue, ko Waitaha, ko Tapuika, ko Ngāti Whakaue, ko Ngāti Tūwharetoa, ko Ngāti Rangitihi me Tūhourangi. Ko te rohe whenua e kōrerohia ake nei ko ērā mai i Wairākei ki Te Awa o te Atua.
2. He iwi moana mātou o Maketu, ā, ko ō mātou whenua me tō mātou rohe moana ērā i kaha ngaua rā e te kino i te paenga o te kaipuke Rena. Hāunga anō ia te titiro a ētahi atu o ngā iwi tangata whenua ko te mauri o te moana me te mauri o te iwi, kāore e taea te wehewehe. Kāti, mai o te wā i heke mai ai ō mātou mātua tūpuna i ngā taitapu i Hawaiki, kāore anō kia kotia ngā ara a Tangaroa.
3. He āhua 13.5 maero moana i te uru o Maketu ngā toka tū moana o Ōtāiti. Nō te paenga o Rena ki Ōtāiti, kāore mātou i āta mōhio he aha tā te wā e tohu ai. Heoi, nō te rangi tuaono rā anō te kōhinu i pae ai ki uta. Ko ngā auē ia a te iwi kāinga kua tīmata kē noa.
4. Ko te taumaha rukiruki o ngā iwi o Maketu i te paenga o Rena nā te haumate o te mauri o Tangaroa, o Hinemoana, me ō rāua uri. Inā koa ko ngā mana ērā o te moana i heke mai ai i a Ranginui rāua ko Papatūānuku. Ko wai ka hua he aha rawa ngā tino pānga ki ngā tāngata whenua, engari inā kē te nui. Heoi, mā te wā anō e kitea ai.
5. Kua noho nei te tangata whenua hei kaitiaki mō tēnā marae, mō tēnā marae o ngā atua Māori. Ka mutu, kei a rātou ngā tohu hei ārahi i a mātou. I te mea he iwi moana mātou e tika ana mā mātou te kawa ki a Tangaroa me Hinemoana e whakaū. I roto i ngā kawenga o ia rā ka āta whakakitea mātou ki ngā tohu o te taiao. “Whakarongo ki a Tangaroa. He tohu”. Engari kāore i rite i a mātou te wāhi ki te kaitiaki. Koia ko te parekura nei. Ā, ka whakairohia ki ō mātou hinengaro mō ngā tau maha kei te tū mai. Kāti, kāore he rongoā e tere māuru ai tēnei mate kua pā ki te iwi.
6. Ko te moana tā mātou pātaka kai, inā hoki ko te kaimoana he oranga mō ō mātou tinana. Engari kāore mātou i āhei ki te kohi, otirā ki te tuari kai ki ō mātou whānau, otirā ki ō mātou marae, me ō mātau kaumātua. Ka heke te waiora, te mauri, te mana o te iwi moana.
7. Ko ngā atua Māori me tā rātou tahua e hora ai ko tō mātou, arā ko tō te iwi moana poutokomanawa. Mā te kaimoana e whai whakaaro ai ā mātou tamariki, otirā e ako ai ki te tiaki, ki te manaaki hok. Ka mutu, ka riro mā mātou anō ērā tūāhua e āta whakatauira atu. Heoi, kāore mātou i āhei ki te hari i ā mātou tamariki ki tātahi ki te whakatutuki i ērā āhuatanga, ki te kohi kaimoana rānei.
8. He nui ngā tikanga e pā ana ki te moana, te kohi kai me te hī ika. Ko ngā tino kaupapa o tēnei mea e mōhio whānuitia ana e tauiwi, arā, te rāhui, ko te mana me te whai whakaaro. Ko te take o te rāhui moana ko te whakaū i te oranga wairua me te oranga tinana.
9. E pōkaikaha ana ō mātou whakaaro i te mea ko te rāhui tuatahi tēnei i tō mātou rohe moana mō te paenga o te kōhinu te take. Ka mutu, e tūtakarerewa ana te iwi kāinga o Maketu, ā, e mōteatea ana te ngākau i te kore mōhio ki te āhua o tēnei mea te parahanga kōhinu. Me kōrero rā hoki te taumaha o ngā tikanga hou i waiho mai ki a mātou.
10. I poke hoki ngā wāhi tapu o tō mātou rohe moana i te kōhinu. Ko Ōkurei te rae i te ākau i Maketu. Ko te roanga o te ingoa ko Te Ōkureitanga o te ihu o Tamatekapua. Ko
36
Tamatekapua te kaihautū o Te Arawa. He wāhi tino hirahira rawa tērā ki a mātou. He mahi nā te wairua tā mātou mukumuku i hgā kohatu o reira.
11. Ko Te Tumu hoki tērā i poke. Ko ia tērā ko te parekura nui whakaharahara i waenga i a Te Arawa me Ngaiterangi. He nui ngā ika o taua riri. He wāhi tapu a Te Tumu.
12. He tangata tino tapu a Ngatoroirangi. Ko te wahapū o tō mātou awa he awa tūpuna. Kua waiho hei atua ki a mātou, ā, koinā i whakatapuhia ai. Heoi, i pākinohia hoki te wahapū o tō mātou awa. He mea kohikohi ngā kōhinu i waho tata atu o te marae i waenga o te wahapū.
13. He tauranga ika a Ōtāiti nō ngā iwi o Te Arawa i noho ki Maketu. Nā Ngātoroirangi anō i tapa. Kua taka katoa a roto i a mātou. Kua whakahekengia te mana o tō mātou tupuna, o Ngātoroirangi i te paenga o Rena. Kāti ko ngā whakakino ia ka pā kau anō ki ana uri. Tērā e māuiuitia te iwi, e mate rawa rānei. Kāti, ko ētahi tonu i māuiui, ā, ko ētahi anō i mate rawa. Koia tēnei ko tō mātou ao e noho nei mātou, ā, ka mutu, ko mātou anake kei te mōhio ki ēnei tūāhuatanga.
14. Ka nui tō mātou pōuri i te kōrero ka mau tonu ngā makenu o te paenga kaipuke mō te hia tau e tū mai nei. E pōuri ana anō hoki i ngā taukumekume i waenganui i ngā tari kāwanatanga me ngā mana whakahaere mō te taha ki ngā utu, otirā mō te warea kētia o aua mana whakahaere ki ngā take pūtea i te wā o tēnei parekura. Ko te kawa o ngā atua Māori ēnei e tānoanoatia nei.
15. He tokomaha ngā tāngata whenua o Maketu i ringa whiti ki ngā mahi whakapaipai. Mahue ana ngā mahi kē atu kia ea ai te matemateāone. Ka tika hoki. Kei a rātou ngā mātauranga o te ao tūroa mō tō rātou kāinga. Engari whakaturihia ana ngā taringa ki ngā kōrero a te hunga mātau ki ngā kōrero mō taua rohe. Kāore i arongia te pai o roto o aua kōrero. I reira ka heke anō te mana o te iwi kāinga i te paenga o te kaipuke.
16. Ka nui pea ngā tau nihorea kei te heke mai. Engari ko ngā mamae o te wairua me te iwi, ka roa kē atu anō e ngau ana.
17. Ko ō mātou tamariki i pāmamae. Inā hoki ko Ōngātoro tō rātou papatākaro. He wai e kauria ai e rātou ia rā o te raumati. Hei konei ākona ai ngā kawenga a te tuakana i roto i ngā mahi tiaki teina. He tino pou te noho o te tuakana teina i roto i ngā whakanekeneke o te iwi. Heoi pōauau katoa ana rātou. Kāore i whakaaetia te kaukau, ā, kāore hoki i whakaaetia ki te āwhina ki te whakapaipai i ngā wāhi i kauria ai e rātou, i takatū ai rātou. Ka rangirua rātou i tērā , engari tē ai he mea i aro ki te whakatatū i ō rātou ngākau. E warea kētia ana ngā pākeke ki te whakapaipai i ngā parahanga i pakarū ki tai, ka pā ki uta.
18. Nā ngā aukati i te haere ki te tahatika i motu ai ngā hononga ki ngā wāhi o reira. 19. E whakaaro nui ana mātou ki te kāpene me tana tuarua i whakaae ki ngā whakatuaki i raro i
te ture. He iwi pono mātou, ā, ki tā mātou titiro he mahi pono hoki tērā. Ki a mātou kāore ō mātou tūpuna e hiahia kia rapu utu mātou mō te take nei. E pai ana ki a mātou te tuku a te kāpene me tana tuarua i ō rāua he. Ā, e mōhio ana mātou he aituā tēnei i tūpono mai, ā, kāore ō mātou hiahia kia whiua anō he heitara ki runga i te kāpene, tana tuarua me ā rāua whānau. Ki ō mātou whakaaro ehara i te mea ko rāua anake e whai pānga ana i roto i te take nei, ā, he māmā noa te whiu i ngā kupu whakapae ki runga i a rāua. Ki a mātou he nui kē atu ngā kino i puta ki te taiao i te mahi whakatahuri i te rere o te awa o Kaituna mā Te Tumu. Nā te Kāwanatanga o Aotearoa tērā kaupapa, engari kāore anō rātou kia tuku i tō rātou hē, kāore rānei i whakaaro ki tētahi rongoā, kaupapa whakarauora rānei. Heoi anō rā, kei konei rātou i whiu ana i te tokorua nei ki ngā whakapae. Ko te tokorua he
37
poutokomanawa nō ā rāua whānau. E pai ana ki a mātou tā rāua tuku i ō rāua hē. Kāore mātou e pai kia kia mauheretia.
Victim Impact Statement of Maketu (Te Arawa)
1. Maketu estuary, Ongatoro, [Te Awanui o Ngatoroirangi], is the final resting place of the Te Arawa waka. Maketu has a rich and complex history. The Te Arawa iwi who have affiliations to Maketu include: Ngati Pikiao, Ngati Makino, Waitaha, Tapuika, Ngati Whakaue, Ngati Tuwharetoa, Ngati Rangitihi, Ngati Rangiwewehi and Tuhourangi. Our traditional coastal boundary extends from Wairakei ki Te Awa o Te Atua.
2. We of Maketu are seafaring people, indigenous to the lands and coastal environment that were heavily impacted by the Rena grounding. Our association with the sea is unique, even compared with other indigenous peoples’ standards. This relationship with the sea was cemented before the time our ancestors sailed from Polynesia to Aotearoa. The ocean connects us with all Pacific Peoples, te ara a Tangaroa. [The highway of Tangaroa)
3. The Maketu Coast is about 13.5 nautical miles west of Otaiiti, though our ancestral
connections begin at Tauranga Harbour. Waitaha and Te Arawa’s whale story is the one now used generically by all Iwi in Tauranga.
4. When the Rena hit Otaiiti, the full extent of the impacts on Maketu (Te Arawa) Iwi were
unknown. Although the oil did not reach us until the 6th day following the grounding the cultural impacts had already started to take effect.
5. The worst impact from a Maketu (Te Arawa) perspective as a direct result of the grounding
was the injury done to Tangaroa me Hinemoana me a raua tamariki. That is to the children of Ranginui and Papatuanuku who have mana over the sea environs and their children. It is an impact that is immeasurable and for which the resulting impacts on us as tangata whenua are yet to be completely experienced.
6. As tangata whenua and kaitiaki, we are expected to protect the domains of atua Maori and
live by their directions. As coastal people, the responsibility to actively protect Tangaroa and Hinemoana sits with us. In the normal circumstances they would give us signs about our environment which we need to take notice of. “Whakarongo ki a Tangaroa. He tohu”. We were unable to fulfil our duties of active protection. We feel we let them down by this disaster happening. This impact will remain imprinted in our hinengaro for many years to come. Culturally, there is no quick solution to remedy the nature of this impact.
7. We rely on the sea to provide us with food. Our bodies are used to eating kaimoana. We
were not able to collect and provide kaimoana – sustenance -‐ to our families, marae and old people. Our physical health as coastal people was compromised.
8. This relationship to the atua Maori and their bounty, for us coastal people, is central to our
culture. Through kai moana we teach our children respect, how to nurture and manaaki and we role model those things to our children. We were not able to take our children to the beach and do this, or collect kai moana.
9. There is much tikanga around the moana and kohi kai and hi ika. The example of rahui which
even non-‐Maori in New Zealand are familiar with, is about respect and mana. Rahui used at
38
sea is about respecting that the rahui has been placed for a reason of safety, physical or spiritual.
10. It was difficult to rationalise this rahui which in our history was the first needing to be
imposed through oil pollution. The unknowns of this oil pollution therefore were very unsettling and depressing for our people at Maketu. In terms of adjusting to the tikanga imposed by oil pollution for such a long time was traumatic.
11. The oil hit many tapu (sacred) parts of our coast. Okurei is the Rocky Peninsula at Maketu.
The full name is Te Okureitanga o te ihu o Tamatekapua meaning the nose of Tamatekapua who was the Captain of the Arawa waka. This place is extremely important to us. We cleaned those rocks with reverence.
12. Te Tumu was a place heavily impacted by the oil. Te Tumu is where the biggest battle
between Te Arawa and Ngaiterangi occurred and where many lives were taken. The area at the Te Tumu cut is a wahi tapu.
13. Ngatoroirangi was a very tapu man. Our estuary is an awa-‐tupuna. A deity and we revere it.
The estuary was impacted by the oil. We picked up oil right in front of the marae mid-‐way up the estuary.
14. Otaiiti is a traditional fishing ground of Maketu (Te Arawa) people. Otaiiti was given its
name by Ngatoroirangi. What has happened is devastating to us. What is worse still is that through the grounding – the mana of Ngatoroirangi has been disrespected -‐ the impacts of this can only affect his descendents. Our people could get sick, some may die. Some did get sick, some have died. This is our reality. Only we have to live with it.
15. We are saddened by the knowledge that the physical impacts of the grounding on the
environment will take years to recover. We are saddened that the authorities are arguing over who pays and that there has been a focus on economic aspects right through the disaster. This is disrespectful to our Maori atua.
16. Many of our iwi members gave up their jobs to volunteer with the oil clean-‐up. They felt like
it was their duty and they are right. Many of them hold vast amounts of local ecological knowledge. None of these people and the localised knowledge they have on Maketu environs was afforded any value. In fact, it was completely ignored. This was an indirect impact of the grounding that again, undermining the mana of the people who have indigenous knowledge built up over centuries of living in the same environment.
17. The financial impact might be felt for some time. The effects of cultural and spiritual impacts
will be longer lasting.
18. Our kids suffered. Ongatoro is their playground. In summer they are normally in the water every day. Through the older children looking after younger siblings and relations, they learn responsibility and the tuakana-‐teina relationship which is necessary for social order in our Maori world. They were left in limbo. They couldn’t swim; they couldn’t help clean-‐up the places they know so intimately. This left them confused and their needs were ignored. The adults/parents/caregivers were busy trying to get on top of the mess.
19. The bans on access to our beaches meant that our connection to these places was severed.
Our rangatiratanga was usurped by Maritime NZ, by foreigners who claimed to know more
39
than us, by District Council Mayors who were quick to support economic issues in direct opposition to our rangatiratanga and our cultural principles.
20. We take this opportunity to acknowledge the guilty pleas given by the Captain and the First Mate. We are people of good faith and see this as an act of good faith also. We think our ancestors would not want us to be vengeful. We are pleased that the Captain and First Mate took ownership of their mistakes. We recognise that this was an accident and we wish to not inflict any further blame or persecution towards the Captain, First Mate and their families. We recognise that in the scheme of things, they are only a small part of this catastrophe and are easy targets. For Maketu, the diversion of the Kaituna river out through the Te Tumu cut, has been a worse environmental disaster. The NZ Government did that to us, but they have not pleaded guilty or offered a remedy or restoration and it’s ironic that they can put so much blame on these two men. These men have families who depend on them. We accept their guilty plea as acknowledging the mistake. We do not support a prison sentence being issued.
ANNEXURE “B”
TE ARAWA TAKITAI MOANA KAUMATUA FORUM RESOLUTIONS REGARDING TE ARAWA KI TAI TRUST’S LACK OF MANDATE
ANNEXURE “C”
MEMORANDUM NO XV OF RENA HEARING PANEL DECISION ON APPLICATION TO AMEND ORIGINAL SUBMISSION BY MR HEMI BENNETT –
22 JULY 2015
MEMORANDUM
IN THE MATTER OF the Resource Management Act 1991
AND
IN THE MATTER OF Applications under Sections 15A and 15B of the Resource
Management Act by ASTROLABE COMMUNITY TRUST for
resource consents to dump (abandon) the remains of the MV
Rena, its equipment and cargo, and associated debris field on
Otaiti/Astrolabe Reef and to authorise any future discharges of
contaminants from the MV Rena, its equipment and cargo, and
associated debris field to the Coastal Marine Area.
Date: 22 July 2015
MEMORANDUM NO XV OF RENA HEARING PANEL DECISION ON APPLICATION TO AMEND ORIGINAL SUBMISSION BY MR HEMI BENNETT
1. By letter dated 2 July 2015, Mr Hemi Bennett made an application to amend his
original submission filed on 8 August 2014, by changing the name of the submitter to
Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū. He also sought leave to produce further
evidence.
2. On 14 July 2015 a Cultural Values Assessment was lodged as evidence in support of
Mr Bennett’s original submission and indicated he was calling a number of further
witnesses including expert witnesses.
3. Memoranda opposing the request to amend the submission and call further evidence
was lodged by the Applicant and by the Mount Maunganui Environmental Group
Limited. Memoranda were also received by Counsel for the Te Arawa parties, the
Regional Council as Consent Authority and the Crown abiding any decision the Panel
may make.
Memorandum No XV of Rena Panel 2
4. The Panel heard the application at a Preliminary Hearing Conference held in
Tauranga on Wednesday, 22 July 2015. The Panel delegated authority to the
undersigned and we heard submissions from Mr Bennett and Miss Horne, Mr James
Gardner-Hopkins for the Applicant, Mr Jason Pou for the Te Arawa parties and Miss
Rachel Boyte for the Regional Council as Consent Authority.
5. At the hearing Mr Bennett confined his application by abandoning the request to
amend the name and to lodging as evidence in support of his original submission the
Ngāti Whakaue Cultural Values Assessment Report dated July 2015 and to both he
and Miss Horne making a submission in support of the original submission.
6. In his original submission Mr Bennett indicated he did not wish to speak to it.
7. Section 40(1) of the RMA provides Mr Bennett no right to be heard in support of his
submission: “at any hearing described in Section 9, the applicant and any person
who has made a submission and stated they wish to be heard at the hearing, may
speak (either personally or through a representative) or call evidence”.
8. There is no explicit statutory basis to provide a dispensation to that requirement.
However, we have a broad discretion to control our procedure. This must be
underlain by fairness and efficiency. We are also mindful of the need to facilitate the
participatory process.
9. Balancing these factors we are of the view that the application should be granted
subject to the following strict limitations:
a) The Ngāti Whakaue Cultural Values Assessment dated July 2015 (which has alreadybeen lodged and posted on the website), shall be evidence filed in support of the originalsubmission of Mr Bennett; and
b) Mr Bennett and Miss Horne may each make a verbal submission in support which is tobe limited to no more than 15 minutes each.
10. Having considered the content of the Cultural Values Assessment we do not consider
that granting leave for its admission would create any unfair disadvantage or
prejudice to any other party.
RG Whiting and R Kirikiri Chairman and Panel Member
ANNEXURE “D”
NGĀTI WHAKAUE KI MAKETŪ CULTURAL VALUES ASSESSMENT
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 1
Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū
Cultural Values Assessment
Whakaue Kaipapa
Maketū
Prepared by Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 2
Executive Summary
Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū has submitted this cultural values assessment (CVA) for and on behalf of the Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū hapu (NWKMH) who are the tangata whenua (people of the land)
living in Maketū. The connection of this hapu (sub-tribe) to the Astrolabe Reef (Otāiti) can be traced back to
the landing of Te Arawa in 1350 A.D.
This hapu descends from Kahumatamomoe (Kahu) who was the son of Tamatekapua, captain of the Arawa
waka. Kahu built his house at Te Koari at Parawai where he cultivated his gardens. From Kahu came a
number of chiefs who lived and died in Maketū. His descendent Rangitihi was born at Te Koari and then
settled in Paengaora at Pakotore Pa. The grandson of Rangitihi is Whakaue Kaipapa who is the illustrious chief whom we take our tribal identity from.
The CVA provides an account of the cultural relationship that NWKMH has with the Astrolabe Reef. The cultural relationship commences with Te Arawa renowned tohunga Ngātoroirangi who named this reef ‘Te
taunga o tā iti o te tangata.’ This reef is a traditional fishing ground that has been fished by NWKMH
fishermen through the centuries.
Interviews with NWKMH elders and others describe the tribal responsibilities that were carried out by individual tribal teams to ensure that the ‘mana’ (authority) of the hapu remained intact. The key themes
evolve around maintaining the customs and protocols of Ngāti Whakaue and ensuring that these customs
were passed down from generation to generation. In this sense it is kaitiaktanga (guardianship) of our
culture, our knowledge and customs.
A brief historical account of NWKMH is covered in this CVA to show how and why the hapu re-connected
with Maketū, the natural resources, the marine resources and the traditional fishing grounds. NWKMH returned in multitude to Maketū in the late 1820’s following the introduction of the musket to tribal warfare by
Hone Hika who invaded the Rotorua area in 1823 and slaughtered many of their kinsmen at Mokoia Island.
The trader named Hans Felk Tapsell wanted to trade dressed flax in return for muskets. The Whakaue chief
Te Amohau saw the opportunity to have this trader become a friend of Ngāti Whakaue. He moved to secure
Tapsell by providing a chieftainess wife named Hineiturama of Whakaue descent. Te Amohau later on in his
life would also be asked by Te Heuheu to consider becoming the first Māori King, which he declined
preferring to lead his tribe Whakaue. The descendents of Te Amohau occupy land at Te Tumu lands which
he took possession of after the battle of Te Tumu in 1836.
Tohi Te Ururangi who was a prominent Whakaue fighting chief and also a large land owner in Maketū, gave
his daughter Ngatai to wed Retireti eldest son of Tapsell. Te Haupapa was another Whakaue chief who
owned land in Maketū and who became a good friend to Tapsell. He died when Te Waharoa came through
Maketū to take revenge for an act carried out by Haerehuka another Whakaue chief who also owned lands in
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 3
Maketū. Whakaue and other tribes were led by Korokai II to avenge the attack by Te Waharoa through
attacking and conquering those living at Te Tumu Pa. It is the people of these prominent chiefs that continue
to own the lands at Maketū.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 4
Table of Contents
1.0 Project pg 5
2.0 Methodology pg 7
3.0 Cultural Connection to the Astrolabe Reef pg 9
4.0 Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Hapu pg 12
5.0 Kaumatua Reflections pg 13
6.0 Assessment of Effects pg 18
7.0 Recommendations pg 19
8.0 Contacts pg 20
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 5
1.0 Project
1.1 Brief of the ProjectAn assessment of the cultural effects of the proposed consent and the impacts this consent will have on the
belief, values, physical and spiritual well-being of NWKMH. The instruction was to provide the cultural
relationship that NWKMH has with the Astrolabe Reef.
1.2 Scope of the AssessmentThe scope of this assessment will cover the brief history of NWHMH and show how through the ages we
have had continued occupation at Maketū. The CVA also provides interviews of kaumatua (elders) that
describe the tribal responsibilities and what they remember of the cultural relationship with Otāiti and in
particular the life of NWKMH living at Maketū.
A cultural values report can identify and describe the values pertaining to an area or resource. They differ from a cultural impacts assessment in that they may not include a description of effects as they do not relate
to a specific activity. However, they may address broad level impacts of development occurring or
anticipated in that area. Cultural values reports can provide direction as to the relevant issues and how
these should be addressed.
1.3 LegislationResource Management Act 1991i
a) Section 36A – Consultation with tangata whenua is specifically required in response to the policy and
planning instrument by virtue of clause 31 (1) (d) of the First Schedule to the RMA. In any event,
consultation can be an important means of achieving the RMA Part 2 (and other) Māori considerations.
b) Section 61, 66 and 74 - Iwi Resource Management Plan – TRONWKM Lodged an Iwi Resource
Management Plan with Regional Council in 2010. That plan provides a map containing the area of
interest of this hapu.
c) Sections 6 & 7 – The protection of Maori beliefs, values and cultural integrity with their ancestral
treasures and the rights to be guardians over such treasures.
d) Section 8 – Treaty of Waitangi Principles – A High Court finding has stated it is the responsibility of the
successors to the Crown, which in this context are the regional and local government councils to accept
responsibility for delivering on the Article 2 promise.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 6
1.4 Council Plans / Protocols pertaining to Ngāti Whakaue ki Tai Hapu
i. Iwi Resource Management Plan – Ngati Whakaue ki Maketu Hapu Plan lodged 2010 with Regional
Council. A map outlining the tribal boundaries of NWKMH is included in Appendix One.
ii. Hapu Protocols Agreement – Lodged with Tauranga City Council in 2007. The areas of interest outlined
in this agreement are Te Tumu, Maketu and Little Waihi. A map outlining the tribal boundaries of
NWKMH is included in Appendix One.
1.5 Identified Issues
1. A foreign object remaining lodged on a reef that has significant history to NWKMH.
2. Traditional fishing grounds of NWKMH located at Otāiti.
3. The effects the grounding of the Rena has impacting on NWKHM customary fishing and seafood catch.
4. The effects the grounding of the Rena has impacted on NWKMH traditional fishing knowledge.
5. A mitigation package that is fair and reasonable and which includes NWKMH.
6. The mana whenua of NWKMH is recognised.
7. Representation of NWKMH on any forums or trusts that are implemented as a result of the grounding of
the Rena.
1.6 Remedies
The remedies are discussed in paragraph 7.0 of the recommendations.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 7
2.0 Methodology
A brief outline of the methodology undertaken and the time spent in collating this assessment.
Task Description Time
1 Hui (Meetings)
- Scope Meeting x1
- Hui-A-Hapu x1 (April)
- Whakaue Hui (Owner, Insurer, Consultants) x1 (May)
- Consultant Update Hui x1 (July)
- Hui-A-Hapu x1 (August)
10 hour
2 Desktop review
Gathering relevant project literature
Desk top research, references to any RMA Planning documents eg
Iwi Management plan, District Plans
Review of elders historical accounts by Interviews
3 hours
3 Field Research
Legislation
Interviews with kaumatua (elders) and other relevant informants
Site visits – Resolve visits x2
Attendance of Workshops held at Maketū. Received information
from technical experts x2
22 hour
4 Development of assessment
RMA 1991 review
Historical Account of Te Arawa
Interviews transcribed
Relevant cultural connections extracted
Cultural Effects on Ngāti Whakaue
Mitigation projects
Recommendations
20 hours
5 Drafting Report
Research Writing
Content Display
40 hours
5 Endorsement by Ngāt Whakaue 2 hours
6 CVA submitted to Beca Planning Consultants 3 hours
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 8
7 Amendments and an Update of the CVA 27 May 2014. 3 hours
TOTAL 101 hours
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 9
3.0 Cultural Connection to the Astrolabe Reef
In the days of the migration when the Māori people were readying themselves to leave Hawaiki there was no
division of the people. They were all known as the people of Ngāti Ohomairangi who left Hawaiki permanently on a canoe called ‘Ngā Rakau Rua a Atuamatua.’ The canoe was named in honour of
Atuamatua, the father and grandfather of the chiefs who were migrating to the new country called Aotearoa.ii
The canoes name changed when Tamatekapua (Tama) was caught by Ngātoroirangi fooling with his wife Kearoa. Ngātoroirangi was so angry he conjured up a powerful whirlpool that is known as ‘te korokoro o te
parata,’ he was about to destroy the canoe and everyone on it in his anger had it not for the women and
children whom he took pity on and immediately calmed the seas so as they would not be frightened
anymore. After this incident the canoe then became known as the ‘Arawa’. To this day the descendents of
the Arawa canoe use the words of the chant that Ngātoroirangi used to calm the waters to round off
speeches of welcome and for concluding works, raised in a chorus, symobilize that all will be well with the tribe and its guests:1
Eke, eke, She lifts, she ascends,
Eke panuku! Eke tangaroa! She glides into safety!rising beyond the wave!
Hui e - O unity -
Taiki e -. O victory -.
Upon sighting the coastal shores of New Zealand, the people described it as a long white cloud, hence the descriptive name of ‘Aotearoa.’ The true name for the North Island is ‘Te Ika A Maui’. Meaning the fish of
Maui, this name came about through the story telling of polynesian hero Maui. Maui had many forms and names throughout the Polynesian Islands; for Māori he is known as ‘Maui Potiki.’
The Arawa canoe was one of the first to reach New Zealand, they came with the specific purpose and a duty
to those on the canoe and to their kinsman who remained in Hawaiki to colonise the new lands.
Kahumatamomoe (Kahu) was mainly responsible on the Arawa waka for naming places. He named Rangitoto an island in the Hauraki Harbour. The name refers to a fight that took place between the captains
over a woman that Tama had kidnapped before leaving Hawaiki. This woman was Whakaotirangi who was
the wife of Ruaeo. During this fight Ruaeo gained the upper hand and punched Tama very hard in the nose so that the blood flowed. The correct version of Rangitoto is ‘Te Rangi i toto ai te Ihu o Tamatekapua’ (The
day blood flowed from the nose of Tama).
The Arawa canoe journeyed onwards through the Hauraki Gulf, the coast of Coromandel and to the coastal areas of the Bay of Plenty, and on the way naming the new lands as they sailed past. Upon entering the waters of ‘Te Moana- A -Toi’ (Bay of Plenty) the long and tiresome journey started to take its toll on the
Arawa people. They stopped at Tuhua (Mayor Island) to collect obsidian stone which was used to make
1 Hiroa, Te Rangi (1987). The Coming of the Maori. Published Whitcoulls Ltd, Wellington.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 10
tools. From there they were making their way to an Island they could see in the distance which they called
Motiti.
Map 3: Places Named in Haurakiiiiby Te Arawa
The canoe rested on a reef near the island for a moment. Ngātoroirangi could see the fatigue setting in on his people. He recited a karakia (prayer) to the Māori Gods to give his people strength to continue on their
journey. Immediately the canoe was surrounded by schools of fish which the people could see just below the
water’s surface; they could see the rich vegetation swirling below. There were different schools of fish: -
hapuka, maomao and tarakihi and others in huge numbers. They praised the Gods for this good ‘omen.’
The very sight of what this new land had to offer warmed the hearts of the weary people and gave them new
motivation to journey on. Ngātoroirangi thanked the Gods for providing for his people and sealed the connection of the reef to the Arawa canoe by naming it ‘Te Taunga o tā iti o te tangata’ (The resting place).
This name was chosen to acknowledge his people aboard the Arawa canoe of how for a short time they had
rested.
Living in a relatively pristine area on the coast of the Western Bay of Plenty NWKMH we take for granted the
accessibility of the customary fishing grounds and the availability of seafood to sustain the hapu (sub-tribe).
So when the Rena vessel ran aground and oil started to spill from the vessel the contamination and adverse
impacts on our hapu was totally unexpected.
On Wednesday 5 October 2011 the MV Rena ran aground on the Astrolabe reef known as Otāiti located 7.4
km North West of Motiti Island. What resulted was the release of an oil spill that damaged and contaminated
the natural landscape of Otāiti, the fishing grounds, the sea life, the seafood and the coastal shores of Te-
Moana-A-Toi (Bay of Plenty).iv The effect of this disaster although small by an international scale was the
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 11
first environmental disaster that was experienced by the tangata whenua (people of the land) groups
including NWKMH.
Map 1: Location of the Astrolabe Reefv
Otāiti is of special significance to NWKMH for the following reasons:-
a) The ancestral history and connection to Hawaiki;
b) The historical account of Ngātoroirangi caring for his people;c) The naming of the reef by Ngātoroirangi ‘Te Taunga o tā iti o te tangata’ in short “Otāiti;”
d) The Arawa ancestor’s spiritual motivation felt at Otāiti;
e) The life essence that the reef provided both spiritually;
f) The uplifting of the reef on the Arawa people physically;
g) The species of fish , vegetation and marine environment;h) The rock itself as a natural landscape and a navigation marker.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 12
4.0 Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū Hapu
The people of Ngāti Whakaue take their ancestral name from a past chief named Whakaue Kaipapa who was a
well respected leader for his people. These people mainly lived at Mokoia Island, along the southern shores of
Lake Rotorua and in Maketū / Little Waihi area. The return of Ngāti Whakaue to Maketu came extensively in the
late 1820’s when a Danish trader named Hans Felk Tapsell moved to Maketu to setup a flax trading business.Tapsell was willing to trade muskets for dressed flax. The strength of the musket was undeniable; the traditional
Māori weaponry was no match. And so when the people heard that a trader named Tapsell wanted to setup a
trading post in Maketū, Ngati Whakaue in particular seized the opportunity to claim him.
The musket wars were a series of Māori tribal battles involving muskets (long barrelled muzzle-loaded guns,
brought to New Zealand by the Europeans). Most of these wars took place between 1818 and 1840vi.
A recollection of one such musket war which affected Ngāti Whakaue was in 1823 when Ngapuhi, led by Hongi Hika attacked Mokoia Island located in Lake Rotorua. Ngāti Whakaue who lived at Mokoia Island with other tribes
armed with traditional weapons only suffered a great loss of life at the hands of the invaders who had muskets.
Ngāti Whakaue may have well been exterminated if it had not been for kuia Te Aokapuarangi who was kin to Hongi
Hika. She asked Hongi to let her people live. His response was “Those that run through the middle of your legs
will live.” The quick thinking Te Aokapuarangi climb on top of the biggest ancestral house and parted her legs over
the doorway. She called to her people to run into the ancestral house if they wanted to be saved. The proverb to mark this historical act “Ko te whare whawhao o Te Aokapuarangi” translated “the crowded house of Te
Aokapurangi” a description that is used when Ngāti Whakaue gather in their ancestral houses.
Drawing 1: Mokoia Island (Dennis King)
Tapsell had heard that Maketū had the best quality flax from Te Arawa women that had been taken as slaves by
Ngapuhi during Hongi’s invasion of Mokoia Island. They told him of the vast wetlands where the flax grew and of
the Maketū estuary and the huge amount of fish and seafood that could be gathered there. Tapsell made up his mind he must see Maketū himself. He travelled to Tauranga and was then brought to Maketū by a number of
chiefs. He purchased land at Maketū and immediately setup a trading post and offered employment to all the
tribes.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 13
The Whakaue chief Te Amohau moved swiftly to secure Tapsell by providing a chieftainess named Hineiturama for
him to marry. Hineiturama had the mana (prestige), presence and genealogy that would give Tapsell a position
amongst Ngāti Whakaue chiefs. This marriage also guaranteed that Tapsell would remain a friend of Whakaue
and provide the firearms that were needed. Te Amohau later on in his life would also be asked by Te Heuheu to
consider becoming the first Māori King, which he declined preferring to lead his tribe Whakaue. The descendents
of Te Amohau occupy Te Tumu lands which he took possession of after the battle of Te Tumu in 1836.
Tohi Te Ururangi who was a prominent Whakaue fighting chief and also a large land owner in Maketū. His
daughter Ngatai in later years married Retireti eldest son of Tapsell. Te Haupapa was another Whakaue chief who
owned land in Maketū and who became a good friend to Tapsell. He died when Te Waharoa a chief of the tribe
Ngāti Haua invaded Maketū for a short time when many of the warriors were away. It was an act of Haerehuka
another Whakaue chief who also owned lands in Maketū that led to Te Waharoa attacking Ngāti Whakaue both at
Maketū and Rotorua. In retaliation of this attack Whakaue and other tribes were led by Korokai II to attack and
conquer those living at Te Tumu Pa.
It is the battles, the land ownership and the continued occupation of Maketū by the descendents of the Ngāti
Whakaue chiefs is the reason why people of these prominent chiefs and the descendents of Tapsell and Hineiturama have a presence in Maketu today. The kaumatua (elders) refer to this as ‘ahi kaa’ (burnng fire) a term
used to indicate the authority of a people to the land.
Map 2: Maketu – The long occupation location of Ngāti Whakaue
5.0 Kaumatua Reflections
Interviews To show the ongoing cultural relationship Ngāti Whakaue has with Otāiti, interviews with Kaumatua (elders)
was carried out.
5.1 Participant OneBarry Wilkinson – Semi-Retired, Former Whakaue Fisherman, Ministry of Fisheries Officer, and Founder of
Maketū Taiapure.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 14
“My position was a fisherman, there was myself, Raki Tapsell and five others. We would travel to the Otāiti
on a regular basis, most of the families had open fishing boats, I had a motored boat, so we could venture
out. There are at least three traditional fishing beds located at Otāiti. That information was passed down to
me. Between the 1960’s to the 1980’s the Otāiti was a regular fishing site for our fishing team.”
“One of our fishermen (Winiata) was working on a commercial fishing vessel because he loved fishing, his sons (Tereanuku and others) are fishermen as well as their children. They all fish from Maketū and visit
Otāiti regularly.”
“Our job in the fishing team was to go fishing whenever there was a tangi (funeral) at Whakaue Kaipapa
Marae. The tangi would last three days, and during that time, we would make three or four trips out there
to fish. The reason for travelling out so often, was that was where they would catch the specific fish types
that were required by the cooks, we were certain to produce a catch and at that time the marae had no
refrigeration, so it was important to provide fresh fish for the visitors.”
“The fish species we caught at Otāiti included hāpuka, swordfish, mako, snapper, tarakihi, kingfish, gernard,
maomao and other varieties. The marae also had its divers who would dive for crayfish, mussels and agar.
The reef is a very valuable resource to us, we have fished there since the landing of the Arawa canoe at
Maketu.”
“Providing fish for the marae was important to the Whakaue hapu. The families relied on us and so did the cooks. We kept the marae tables ladened with fresh fish. It was to honour and uphold the status of the
person laying in state and his family. It was also to uphold the ‘mana’ (prestige) of Ngāti Whakaue marae.
Delicies of fish, eel and seafood appeals to the Māori pallet so it was considered a high value food for the
visitors. We took days off work in those days to carry out our fishing duties.”
“The local Whakaue people still go fishing and diving at Otāiti. The flora is mainly kelp. I can remember
going out there with a hand line and catching a tonne of fish in 24 hours, that’s alot, these days you’d be
lucky to catch half that with a hand line.”
“When we visited the Astrolabe with the Resolve crew (24 March 2013), I could tell that the life essence of
the reef was still a fair way away, around 3-4 years away. There are physical signs that can be seen. The
winds, the tides and the currents, the bird species that were not present and the rock itself. Because we
have fished on it for many years we have experienced when the reef is fully alive. There is also the spiritual
side of the reef that should be considered. Māori are very connected to their Māori Gods.”
“When I first saw the oil from my window (view is out to sea towards Mōtiti) I was devastated because in a disaster like that there was nothing we could do to guard the natural resources. The heartening thing that
although there was panic and stress in the Maketu community all the people got stuck in and cleaned up the
oil, we all did the work however small, the contributions were great to cleaning up the oil.”
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 15
5.2 Paricipant TwoBouy Corbett – Semi-retired, owner Bouys Backpackers and Tourism Ventures. His father and uncles were
Whakaue fishermen.
“Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu definitely has a relationship with Otāiti. When I was young my father would row
out there in an open boat, we didn’t have a motor for the boat. We couldn’t travel out there all the time but
when it was called for the people would row out and spend all day fishing and diving. We would go to Otāiti to fish and dive closer to Motiti for crayfish. We would catch specific types of fish that you couldn’t get
around Maketu like Hapuka, Maomao and Gernard.”
“The fishermen went out there to fish, because you were certain to catch fish, you couldn’t afford to return
with no fish, that was unheard of. There was one incident I had three uncles who went out to Otāiti to fish
and they got caught in a storm, they were lost at sea for three weeks, however they survived and returned
home.”
“It was great in our days, we would work as one people, setting the nets and then all the people would come
down the beach and we would pull the nets in. The amount of kahawai we would catch was enough to feed
everyone. The men would pull the nets in, me and my friends would pick up the fish and run them up to the
women, ‘Aunty Kehu’ would be waiting with her mussel shell ready to scale the fish, they would dig a hold in
the sand and drop the fish in there to keep the fish moist, then there would be another row of people behind
the women watching the kids and taking over when anyone got tired. Then when all the fish was scaled and
the nets put away, everyone would take their share of the fish, there was plenty to go around, each familywould have at least 6 or 7 fish to take home.”
5.3 Participant Three Nepia Ranapia – Pukenga (Expert) of Mōtiti Heritage and History. No Ngāti Te Hapu and Ngāti
Whakahemo, lives at Motiti Island.
“Smoke signals were used to signal Maketu (Whakaue). The fish stations located at Mōtiti were for
Whakaue and other trading partners. They would be given fishing boundaries which included Otāiti. There
were controls in place of where they could and could not fish. We would also trade dried koura (crayfish), paua, deep sea hapuka, and dried harera. This was exchanged for Kereru, dried pipi, kuku (mussels) and
timber. The kaimona (seafood) was packed up and sent to Maketu. Motiti had very little timber, it was
described as a flat island by Captain Cook in 1769. Trade with the natives at Maketu began before pre-
european occupation and it was still going up to the 1950’s when alienation of the lands and colonisation
started having an impact on the people.”
“Te Arawa renowned tohunga Ngātoroirangi named this reef ‘Te taunga o tā iti o te tangata.’ The use of
tohunga (priest) would indicate where fishing grounds were good, karakia was used. Tohunga are now superseded by markers, maps and GPS. Tohunga performed rituals to lift tapu (sacredness). Whakaue was
given land and fishing rights in the summer season to ensure trading with Motiti remained open. Tapsell
surveyed Motiti in 1865 so the Government could take-over the land here. Matarakuitia is the half way point
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 16
between Maketū and Motiti, it is the boundary that is upheld between Whakaue, Whakahemo and Patuwai ki
Waho. Otāiti was known for the abundance of fish species. It is where the hapuka beds are still fished.”
5.4 Whakaue ki Tai Kaumatua ForumTe Wano Walters – Rangatira o Ngāti Whakaue ki Tai, Junior Tapsell – Hunter and gatherer, kaumatua,
Manu Pene retired Māori professional, kaumatua o Ngāti Whakaue, Frances Clarke – Kaikaranga o
Whakaue Kaipapa Marae.
1. “All the whanau (family) at Maketū had their duties at the marae. For me I was destined and groomed for
the paepae by my mother Kehu and aunties Te Rohu and Ngātoru. For some whanau it was the fishing
duties, and for others they were the cooks. Now Otāiti was fished by our people some would use the fish
they caught to barter for other goods, they would provide fish and seafood to those living in Rotorua, it
was how they made their living and put food on the table. The families that had the fishing skills in those
days were carrying on the hunting and gathering skills they learnt from their forefathers and it is still like that today. It is the fishermen and divers who know about the fishing grounds of Whakaue ki Tai. They
had to provide the fish and the seafood for the marae tables. Most whanau have their favourite spots for
fishing and diving. Not many people would share their favourite spots and for some whanau Otāiti was
one of those spots.”
“The Rena oil cleanup my wife and grandchildren helped clean the rocks at Okurei and pickup the
rubbish. My wife is in her 70’s that’s how much we were affected by this disaster. We had generations of Whakaue people giving a hand. The marae was responsible in feeding the people and our people
were also the cooks. So you can see the generations of marae duties being passed down. The cleanup
was a big effort by all to get Maketū looking beautiful and back to a clean state, this is what you would
call kaitiakitanga (guardianship).”
2. “From the estuary we would get pipis, koterotero (sea-anemie), tuangi (cockles), flounder, and titiko. At
the mouth of the estuary there is a rock where we got mussels, we could also get paua, pupu, scallops
kukuroa (horse mussels) and fish. Outside the estuary we use to haul fish nets from the mouth of the estuary down to Papamoa, we would catch plenty of snapper, kahawai, trevellie and crayfish.” We would
row out in a dinghy about 200 yards and play out a rope that was tied to it, then extend the net parallel to
the beach and back in again with another rope. All of us would then haul the ropes till we got it in; we
would share the fish. The size of the shellfish was huge; the food bowl provided well for the Whakaue
marae tables. Because we had seafood in abundance I suppose visitors expected the tables to be filled
with all the beautiful seafood (kaimoana) we could gather. In the Māori sense you would say we are
rich.”
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 17
Photo 1: Maketū Estuary (Taken from Fishing at Maketu 2013).
5.5 Key Findings from the Interviews
Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū operate according to traditional customs and protocols that were controlled and organised. The cultural relationships discussed by the kaumatua (elders) are of recollections they
remember. The traditional connection through Ngātoroirangi was not prevalent in the interviews. The
kaumatua described the responsibilities and the fishing duties carried out by the fishermen to uphold the
prestige of the marae and the hapu (sub-tribe). They speak of the fish caught on each fishing ground at
Otāiti, which was a favourite fishing ground for Whakaue fishermen. Otāiti was fished for specific
species of fish that were not available at Maketū. Ngāti Whakaue values the marine resources and
carries out their role as kaitiaki (guardian) actively. They regularly checked the fish stocks at Otāiti and searched for new fishing grounds.
There is a historical component covered by expert Nepia Ranapia who states that in pre-european
times NWKHM had trading relationships with the Motiti Islanders and that they accessed fishing
grounds at Otāiti.
The kaumatua also speak of the family members from Whakaue who were involved with cleaning up the
beaches and rocks to clean the oil released from the Rena wreck. It is not a normal practice for 70 year olds to be cleaning rocks and collecting oil contaminants. We can say that ‘kaitiakitanga’ (guardianship)
of the natural environment is a life-long responsibility.
The operations of catering for the volunteers who arrived in Maketū to help clean the beaches allowed
the Whakaue marae to showcase their expertise in catering for large numbers of people, it showed that
the marae is the focal point of the people and culture. However the purpose of why the volunteers
descended on Maketū was an unusual position for NWKMH to be in.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 18
6.0 Assessment of Effects
Culturally a foreign object that has been grounded on a significant reef does not sit well within the Maori
psychic. We are a people who have a responsibility to carry out in terms of ‘kaitiakitanga’ (guardianship) of
the marine, natural and environmental resources for future generations to come.
6.1 Proposal of the wreck remaining at Otāiti.What are the cultural impacts of Ngāti Whakaue if the Rena wreck was to remain permanently at Otāiti?
1. A foreign object permanently occupying natural space at Otāiti.
2. The knowledge that traditional waka building was made from native timbers that did not damage the
marine environment.
3. The traditional fishing grounds have a foreign object occupying that space.
4. The adverse effects on the the cultural customs and practices.
5. The adverse effects on the practice of ‘kaitiakitanga’ (guardianship).
6. The ongoing risks of contamination of kaimoana (seafood) through releases.
7. The loss of the special significance of Otāiti due to an unnatural object remaining at Otāiti.8. Other impacts that may cause negative effects for the future generations.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 19
7.0 Recommendations
In pursuant of the Resource Management Act 1991 Part 2, Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu hapu as the most
affected sub tribe in Maketu recommend that:-
1. All contaminants are removed or as much as possible without loss of life;
2. That all the containers are removed or as much as possible or without loss of life;
3. That ongoing inshore and offshore monitoring continues for no less than 10 years;
4. That as much of the natural marine space at Otaiti is returned to the natural marine environment prior to the grounding.
7.0.1 Mitigation 1. The tribal boundaries of Ngati Whakaue ki Maketu hapu is predominately Maketu. An assurance that
TRONWM shall be consulted and represented on trusts, forums or committees that are formed as a
result of the resource consent is guaranteed.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 20
8.0 Contacts
All correspondence or inquiries concerning this report should be directed to the Manager, TRONWKM, c/-
The Landing Maketu, Maketu 3138. Contract email: [email protected], telephone: 07 5332101 or 027
2910737.
Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu Board Members:
Moerangi Potiki
Chairperson
Ph: 027 8233512
Manu Pene
Vice Chairperson
Ph: 022 3133932
Liam Tapsell
Board Member
Ph: 021 1227365
Aroha Wilkinson
Treasurer
Ph: 0210 367363
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 21
Appendix One
Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu Iwi Resource Management Plan
This map that shows the Ngati Whakaue ki Maketu boundaries Map lodged with Regional Council in 2010. This area covers Maketu, Little Waihi and Te Tumu.
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 22
Appendix TwoGlossary of Maori Words and Abbreviations
Maori English Ahi kaa Origin continuous occupationHapu Sub TribeHui Meeting Iwi Main TribeKai FoodKaitiakitanga Defined in the Resource Management Act 1991 as the exercise
of guardianship by the tangata whenua of an area in accordance with tikanga Maori in relation to natural and physical resources; and includes the ethic of stewardship
Karakia PrayerKaumatua Elder Kawa Procedures of how things are carried out.Koha Gift Koroua Elderly MaleKuia Elderly FemaleMahinga Kai Traditional food sourcesMana Whenua Defined in the Resource Management Act 1991 as customary
authority exercised by an iwi or hapu in an identified area.Manuhiri Visitors Marae Courtyard / Maori Meeting ComplexMaketū Coastal settlement of Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketū people.Otāiti Astrolabe ReefRūnanga Main Authority for a tribe or Sub-tribeTapu Sacred
Tangata Whenua Defined in the Resource Management Act 1991 in relation to a particular area, means the iwi, or hapu, that holds mana whenua over that area
Tangihanga / Tangi Funeral, grieving processTaonga TreasureTe Moana-A-Toi Bay of PlentyTikanga Maori customary values and practices Tohu Sign / OmenTohunga High Priest—Expert in a given fieldTūpuna AncestorWaahi Tapu Defined in the Historic Places Act 1993 as a place sacred to
Maori in the traditional, spiritual, religious, ritual, or mythological sense. The term wahi tapu may however have different meanings to different iwi and hapu.
Waka Canoe Whanau FamilyWhakapapa Family Tree/LineageWhaikorero Oratory Whakatauaki ProverbWhare Kai Dining Room Wharenui Meeting House
PDF Pro Tria
l
© All Rights Reserved Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu May 2014 Page 23
References & Resources
i The University of Auckland (2012). Making Good Decisions Workbook 6th Edition.
ii Te Waata Cribb (2013). Te Arawa Traditional History.
iii The Encyclopedia of NZ (2013). Te Arawa peoples. Hauraki Story page 2. Cited www.teara.govt.nz 02 August 2013 [Online].
iv Stager, T. (2011). The Impacts of the Rena Wreck on the Mauri of Motiti. Cited www.frontiersabroad.com07 August 2013 [Online].
v BOP Polytechnic (2013). Maps Page, Bay of Plenty Marine Library. Cited www.marinelibrary.co.nz 29 July 2013 [Online].
vi Cited online www.teara.govt.nz. 28 May 2014.
PDF Pro Tria
l
ANNEXURE “E”
NGĀTI WHAKAHEMO IWI CULTURAL VALUES ASSESSMENT
1©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
Ngāti Whakahemo Iwi
Cultural Values Assessment
Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo
PDF Pro Tria
l
2©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
1. Executive Summary
The Whakatauki (proverb) “All of Ngāti Whakahemo are Patuwai, but not all Patuwai are Ngāti Whakahemo.” This means all of Whakahemo people can connect their links to Patuwai tribe living at Mōtiti, but not all of
the Patuwai people at Motiti are connected to Ngāti Whakahemo.
The history of Ngāti Whakahemo in accordance with the proverb is we acknowledge that we are part of the
Patuwai people from Motiti. We also acknowledge that not all of the Patuwai people are part of Ngāti
Whakahemo.
This cultural values assessment (CVA) has been volunteered by Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo to inform
the Rena Owner / Swedish Insurers that we are an Iwi (tribe) that has been affected by the grounding of the
Rena Vessel at Otāiti.
The ancient history of Ngāti Whakahemo people are they affiliate to two traditional canoes: Takitimu and
Mātatua. Their ancestral lands are located at Pukehina, Maketu, Mōtiti and Motunau Islands. We can recall
our historical kith and kinship with Motiti back to the 17th century. At that time our ancestors Maruahaira and
Te Hapu (Chief of Patuwai) brought their people from a place called Hakuranui to Torere near Whakatane.
They stayed for a time at Torere before Maruahaira set sail with his war parties for Pukehina located along
the coast of the Bay of Plenty. The purpose was to avenge a curse that had been uttered against his good name. Maruahaira took the lands at Pukehina by conquest. Te Hapu travelled with Maruahaira but went to
Motiti and while at Motiti he took up the lands there. Maruahaira and Te Hapu kept the kith and kinship
relationships close. They encouraged their people to intermarry to retain the lands and keep hold of the
natural resources.
The value of Otāiti to Ngāti Whakahemo is it’s a historical ‘toka’ (reef) that was part of the ‘pataka’ (larder)
which the tribe accessed for food. Ngāti Whakaehmo were a seafaring tribe that hunted for delicies of fish
and mammals that they could not find at Pukehina. The hunting grounds for Ngāti Whakahemo included the outer Island of Motunau (Plate) where they hunted for muttonbirds and seals. The fish that were caught at
Otāiti was specific mainly to the delicies of fish that could not be caught at Pukehina. These types were
‘Karetataka’ (type of hapuka) fish and the ‘Kotemoeore’ (blue nose). These fish species were the food of
Chiefs and Tohunga (high priest). They were highly valued fish and that is why the fishermen went to Otāiti.
During the summer season Ngāti Whakahemo would take up residence at Motiti, unlike the trading partners
that Te Hapu (Patuwai) accommdated on a temporary basis at Motiti; Ngāti Whakahemo being kin had no
distinction placed on them; they had accommodation and access to the fishing grounds at their leisure.
The kith and kinship in the early 20th C, saw Ngāti Whakahemo and Patuwai re-build an ancestral house at
Maketu called Te Awhe-o-Te Rangi in 1904. This house was to be used to accommodate Patuwai when they
came to Maketu to trade. In those days Maketu was a thriving port and provided lots of opportunity for the
tribes to trade. Timi Waata a chief of Ngāti Whakahemo and Te Puhi Kehukehu a Patuwai chief were also
PDF Pro Tria
l
3©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
part of a contingent who put together a pool of money to purchase a veseel named Maruiwi. They brought
the vessel so they could transport cargo to Maketu and other ports. The vessel cost over three hundred
pounds which in those days was a significant amount of money. The purchase of the vessel itself signifies
the bond that the two tribes had for each otheri.
PDF Pro Tria
l
4©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
Table of Contents
1.0 Project pg 5
2.0 Methodology pg 7
3.0 Description of Study Area pg 8
4.0 Identity of Ngāti Whakahemo pg 9
5.0 Customary Interests pg 11
6.0 Historical Reflections pg 12
7.0 Cultural Values associated with Otāiti pg 15
8.0 Recommendations pg 16
9.0 Contacts pg 17
PDF Pro Tria
l
5©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
1.0 Project
1.0 Brief of the Projecti. The brief of this assessment has been collated to provide a cultural values assessment that
describes the cultural relationship of Ngāti Whakahemo to Otāiti the reef. Other than this, there
were no particular instructions given.
1.2 Scope of the AssessmentThe scope of this assessment is to provide a description on the cultural values and relationship that
Ngāti Whakahemo has with Otāiti. The assessment describes the historical genealogy connection of Te Hapu (Patuwai) of Motiti Island and Ngāti Whakahemo according to their proverb “All of Ngāti
Whakahemo are Patuwai, but not all of Patuwai are Ngāti Whakahemo.” We conclude with the
cultural value issues and recommendations.
1.3 Cultural Values AssessmentA cultural values report can identify and describe the values pertaining to an area or resource. They
differ from a cultural impacts assessment in that they may not include a description of effects as they
do not relate to a specific activity. However, they may address broad level impacts of development
occurring or anticipated in that area. Cultural values reports can provide direction as to the relevant
issues and how these should be addressed.
1.4 Legislation - Resource Management Act 1991ii
a) Section 36A – Consultation with tangata whenua is specifically required in response to the policy and
planning instrument by virtue of clause 31 (1) (d) of the First Schedule to the RMA. In any event,
consultation can be an important means of achieving the RMA Part 2 (and other) Māori
considerations.
b) Sections 6 & 7 – The protection of Maori beliefs, values and cultural integrity with their ancestral
treasures and the rights to be guardians over such treasures.
c) Section 8 – Treaty of Waitangi Principles – A High Court finding has stated it is the responsibility of
the successors to the Crown, which in this context are the regional and local government councils to
accept responsibility for delivering on the Article 2 promise.
1.4.1 Council Plans / Protocols pertaining to Ngāti Whakahemo
i. Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo is a newly established entity. They have representation on both
Māori Forums of the Western Bay District Council and the Tauranga City Council.
ii. They have not lodged an Iwi Resource Management Plan with either the Regional Council or District
councils at the time of the writing of this assessment.
PDF Pro Tria
l
6©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
1.5 Issues Identified
1. A foreign object remaining lodged on a reef that has significance to Ngāti Whakahemo.
2. Traditional fishing grounds of Ngāti Whakahemo located at Otāiti.
3. The effects the grounding of the Rena has impacted on the customary fishing and seafood catch of
Ngāti Whakahemo.
4. The effects the grounding of the Rena has impacted on Ngāti Whakahemo traditional fishing
knowledge.
5. A mitigation package that is fair and reasonable and which includes Ngāti Whakahemo.
6. The mana whenua of Ngāti Whakahemo and their tribal boundaries are recognised.
7. Representation of Ngāti Whakahemo on any forums or trusts that are implemented as a result of the
grounding of the Rena.
8. The prestige (mana) of Ngāti Whakahemo has been affected through no involvement in
commissioned cultural impacts assessments reports that were carried out.
1.5.1 Remedies
The remedies are covered in 8.0 of the recommendations of this assessment.
PDF Pro Tria
l
7©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
2.0 Methodology
A brief outline of the methodology undertaken and the time spent in collating this assessment.
Task Description Time
1 Hui (Meetings)
- Scope Meeting x1
- Hapu Hui Bi-Monthly Updates x2 (June and August)
- Consultant Update Hui x1 (July)
10 hour
2 Desktop review
Gathering research of Whakahemo History
Whakapapa / Land Research
10 hours
3 Field Research
CVA outline, RMA 1991 legislation
Interviews with kaumatua (elders)
Site visits – Resolve visits x1
Attendance of Workshops held at Maketū. Received information from technical experts x2
22 hour
4 Development of assessment
Historical Account of kith and kinship
Interviews transcribed
Relevant cultural connections extracted
Cultural Effects on Ngāti Whakahemo
Mitigation projects
Recommendations
20 hours
5 Drafting Report
Research Writing
Content Display
40 hours
5 Peer review or endorsement by Ngāti Whakahemo 31 August 2013 2 hours
6 Final assessment submitted to Beca Planning Consultants 3 hours
7 Amendments and proofing of CVA in May 2014 5 hours
TOTAL 112 hours
PDF Pro Tria
l
8©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
3.0 Description of Study Area / Location
3.1 On Wednesday 5 October 2011 the MV Rena ran aground on the Astrolabe reef known as Otaiti
located 7.4 km North West of Motiti Island. What resulted was the release of an oil spill that damaged and contaminated the natural landscape of Otaiti, the fishing grounds, the sea life, the
seafood and the coastal shores of Te-Moana-A-Toi (Bay of Plenty).iii The effect of this disaster
although small by an international scale was the first environmental disaster that was experienced by
the tangata whenua (people of the land) groups including Ngāti Whakahemo.
Map 1: Location of Astrolabe Reef iv
PDF Pro Tria
l
9©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
4.0 Identity of Ngāti Whakahemo
The Whakatauki “All of Ngāti Whakahemo are Patuwai, but not all Patuwai are Ngāti Whakahemo.” This
means all of Whakahemo people can connect their links to Patuwai tribe living at Mōtiti, but not all of the
Patuwai people are connected to Whakahemo.
Ngāti Whakahemo are of two traditional canoes: Takitimu and Mātatua. Their ancestral lands extends from
Pukehina, Maketu, Mōtiti and to Motunau Islands. The ancestors of Patuwai ki Waho (Te Hapu) and Ngāti
Whakahemo (Maruahaira) came from an ancient Māori settlement called Hakuranuiv on the East Coast of
the North Island. It was a curse that was uttered against Maruahaira that forced the Ngāti Whakahemo chief
to journey to Pukehina and wage war against the tribe living there at the time. Maruahaira took the lands at
Pukehina by conquest; he and his people then known as Ngāti Maruahaira took up residence and have remained permanently at Pukehina since the 17th Century. Te Hapu also journeyed with Maruhaira to
Pukehina but veered off to the island of Motiti and did not take part in the battle. Maruahaira and Te Hapu
maintained their kinship, they encouraged their descendents to intermarry to keep the connections intertribal.
The Ngāti Whakahemo living at Pukehina have always recognised their connection to Motiti through the kith
and kinship relationships. The tribal bonds ensured that the Ngāti Whakahemo families are land owners at
Motiti Islands and vice versa, those of Te Hapu descent and are connected to Ngāti Whakahemo have lands
at Pukehina.
Photo 1: Motiti Island, Bay of Plenty. (Taken by open2view.co.nz.)
Ngāti Whakahemo were best described by Gilbert Mair who was a land court assessor and honoured for his
Military background in the 19th C called the Ngāti Whakahemo a ‘distinct people.’ This was stated because
of Ngāti Whakahemo geneaology links to more than one traditional canoe.
4.1 Cultural Connection to Otāiti
Tangaroa the Māori God of the oceans and sea environments and all that live there provided good fishing
grounds and plentiful stocks of hapuka, tamure, tarakihi, koura (crayfish) and other varieies of fish for Ngāti
Whakahemo at Otāiti. The fish that was of high value was the ‘Hapuka’ which has been described as the
food of the Chiefs and of the Tohunga (priest). There were only a few traditional fishing grounds where
PDF Pro Tria
l
10©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
hapuka could be fished and Otāiti was one of those grounds. Otāiti reef formed a significant part of the
‘pataka’ (larder) that was a food resource for Ngāti Whakahemo.
The fishermen of Ngāti Whakahemo would fish beyond Otāiti at times because of their fearless approach as
a seafaring people. Also exploring new fishing grounds was a must to provide for the future generations.
For Ngāti Whakahemo because they were seafarers exploring, fishing, diving and hunting in the marine environment was their natural environment. Ngāti Whakahemo were known for their deep sea fishing skills
and would also go after whales and the mako (shark). Otāiti and the value of what this reef could provide
was information that was handed down generation to generation. While Pukehina was plentiful in varieties
of marine life, some of the species of fish like hapuka could be sourced at Otāiti, and for our tribe adding
variety to the diet, and upholding the mana (prestige) of Ngāti Whakahemo people being a seafaring people
was important.
Ngāti Whakahemo fishermen would also travel to the island of Motunau (Plate) Island for muttonbirds, tuatara and seals. They also used Motuhaku as a navigation rock when they were moving into deeper
waters beyond the inner threshold of coasal fishing. Ngāti Whahaemo would reside during the summer
season at Motiti, they would spend their days hunting for the delicies that the Māori pallet longed for. The
fishermen would smoke, dry, brime fish, birds, whale meat not only for the winter food storage but also to
trade with other tribes.
Historian Nepia Ranapia an expert historian of Patuwai / Whakahemo descents says that the Patuwai tribe of Motiti provided fishing stations on Motiti Island for Whakaue in particular who was a trading partner of
Patuwai. They would allocate a fishing boundary and placed tight controls on the trading partner. For Ngāti
Whakahemo they were whanau (family) so no restrictions were placed on them, they could utilise Otāiti and
the surrounding reefs at their leisure and they were also allowed to gather as much fish and seafood as they
could carry on their canoes. It was also Nepia who provided the historical account and Māori name of the Astrolabe as ‘Te taunga o tā iti o te tangata’ (The resting place of the people).
PDF Pro Tria
l
11©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
5.0 Customary Interests The area of customary interests of Ngāti Whakahemo extends along the Bay of Plenty coast from
Owhara/Ngawhara in the West. From the West we extend to Pokare in the East and then inland to the
Pongakawa Valley in the South. From the South we extend towards the sea towards the Islands of Motiti
and Motunau in the North. The area of interests includes the Pongakawa and Waihi riversvi.
5.1 Maketū InterestsLocated at Maketū there is the ancestral house Te Awhe-o-Te-Rangi re-built in 1904. This was a replacement of an earlier Ngāti Whakahemo ancestral house. This house has a connection to Patuwai at
Mōtiti. The house was built by Whakahemo and Patuwai families as an accommodation house for when
Patuwai families came to Maketu to trade their goods with Whakaue hapu living at Maketu (refer
appendicies). At that time Maketu was a thriving village where bartering was amicably good for both tribes.
Ngāti Whakahemo and Patuwai joined together and cultivated huge gardens of potatoes, melons, corn and
kumara at Paengaroa which they sold at the market in Maketu and also had shipped to Aucklandvii.
Photo 2: Te Awhe Marae, Maketu.
PDF Pro Tria
l
12©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
6.0 Historical Reflections
Interviews with Kaumatua
To show the ongoing cultural relationship Ngāti Whakahemo has with Otāiti, interviews were carried out with
Kaumatua.
6.1 Participant OneNepia Ranapia – Semi-Retired, Historian of Ancient Cultures, Tradesperson. Lives at Motiti Island. Te
Hapu, Patuwai and Ngāti Whakahemo descent.
It is the historical connection that Ngāti Whakahemo has with Otāiti that is the most relevant for this
assessment. The geneaology (whakapapa) that is shared between Ngāti Whakaehemo and Te Hapu
(Patuwai) of Motiti is unique. Otāiti is a seasonal fishing ground; we went there in the summer during the northerly winds. That was the time when the ‘Karetataka’ (type of hapuka) fish would be abundant. The
Kareataka fish is a delicacy to us, we also went for another Hapuka variety and ‘Kotemoeore’ (blue nose).
These fish species were the food of Chiefs and Tohunga (high priest). The surface fishes are OK, the
tarakihi and kingfish species, but we went to Otāiti mainly for the hapuka. Why would we go out there for fish
species we can get around Motiti Island easily. The reason I would fish at Otāiti was for my own families
existence, the Islanders here have the resources around the island at their fingertips. My father was Awiki
Ranapia he was brought up on Motiti, he moved to the Island from Pukehina when he was 10 years old. He
was given to his kuia to be brought up on the ancestral land. My older brother Paraire has been living at Motiti since the 1970’s and I have joined him to live on our ancestral lands. My family are also of Ngāti
Whakahemo descent so we also own land at Motunau (Plate) Island where we are able to hunt muttonbirds.
Motunau Island is a traditional hunting ground for our people. Motiti land is unique because it still retains
Māori values, however retention of the cultural heritage is a concern with very little people having that
knowledge. We have other fishing reefs that we access around Motiti. There is a significant cultural history
that is unique only to Otāiti. When you fish at Otāiti these days you take your chances because you are
competing with all the fishing boats from Tauranga. Since the grounding of the Rena access to the fishing
ground and the fish has been cut off. With all the pollution that has been experienced from the Rena I’m unsure whether I will return to fish there.
Ngāti Whakahemo were industrious during the 19th C the chiefs which included Hamiora Pāteoro secured
the lands for Ngāti Whakahemo at Motiti Island. He along with Timi Waata another chief of Ngāti
Whakahemo, Te Puhi Kehukehu a Patuwai chief and others pooled their monies together to buy a shipping
vessel. They invested in a ship to take produce from Maketu to Auckland and at that time they reaped
rewards from this venture.
PDF Pro Tria
l
13©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
Te Moutere o Motuiti was an island where tohunga would participate in wananga. It was an island where the
stars the trade winds and the seas could be observed for long periods by those that were skilled in such
areas.
6.2 Paricipant TwoHuriwaka Rewa – Semi-Retired, WBOPDC Chair Māori Forum, Farmer. Lives at Pukehina, Brought up at
Motiti Island. Te Hapu and Whakahemo descent.
I was taken to Motiti Island from Pukehina at the age of two years old I was whangai (Māori adoption) to a
whanau (family) who lived at Motiti. I learnt to fish at an early age, to help my father gather food by rowing
around the rocks closest to the shore, we had no need to go out beyond the rocks at Motiti. In those days
you could get paua (abalonie) and kina (sea urchins) within a few feet of water, we were reliant on the sea to
sustain the people. The mainland and the luxury of going to the shop to buy groceries was non existent at
Motiti. The structure of the people at Motiti was the same as all Māori hapu (sub tribe), each family weregiven specific responsibilites. We had those who looked after the marae, those who did the mataitai
(cultivating), those who were responsible for going to fetch the kai (food). My parents responsibility was
looking after the kaumatua (elders).
The kai (food) resources from the sea was plentiful at Motiti it fed all the whanau (familiy) there. There were
three families who had the boats on the Island and were the fishermen on the Island. We would serve
‘hapuka’ (groper) on the marae tables for the visitors. The head fisherman at that time was of Patuwai descent but not Whakahemo, that koroua is who I remember as the main fisherman on Motiti; my parents
also had a fishing boat that was used by the fishermen. I use to watch the fishermen coming in with their
catch of hapuka (groper). Food was absolutely plentiful around the Island but the fishermen had to go and
get hapuka. They also checked on the fishing grounds in and around Motiti. The Island of Motunau was
also part of the hunting grounds we would go there and get titi (mutton birds).
At Motiti the lands were subdivided into blocks so you have the families of Ngāti Whakahemo in blocks of
lands here at Motiti. My parents lived on ancestral land at Motiti that belonged to our families. We moved to Rotorua for work reasons after a time. My father did drain laying and employed a number of whanau (family)
members to come and work for him.
6.3 Key Findings from the Ngāti Whakahemo Interviews
The main key points that were recognised in:-
Interview One – The historical account of Otaiti is significant. The fish at Otaiti namely the three hapuka species were a delicacy fit for Chiefs and Tohunga (High Priest). Otaiti was a summer season fishing
ground. Seafood was easily accessible around Motiti Island’ the islanders and Ngāti Whakahemo fishermen
went to Otaiti for the hapuka fish. Motiti Island was where tohunga (priests) would wananga (workshop) on
navigation and prayer. Living on ancestral lands is important and retaining the cultural heritage of Motiti.
Motunau Island was part of the traditional fishing grounds. Ngāti Whakahemo ancestors purchased a ship to
PDF Pro Tria
l
14©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
transport their goods to Maketu and Auckland. The pollutants and the wreck remaining on Otaiti will
influence tangata whenua (people of the land) from fishing at Otāiti in the future.
Interview Two – The fishermen fished beyond the Island at the reefs for ‘Hapuka’ (groper). Motiti Island was
rich in food resources which meant whanau (family) only needed to gather seafood around the rocks to get
their daily food. The structure of Motiti hapu (sub-tribe) was certain families had responsibilities to carry out. Those with the boats were the fishermen. Like Otāiti, Motunau was part of the traditional fishing grounds.
Most families at Motiti live on ancestral lands. Work reasons saw some families leave Motiti Island.
PDF Pro Tria
l
15©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
7.0. Cultural Values associated with Otāiti
a. A Pataka (Larder).Otāiti was a traditional fishing ground for Ngāti Whakahemo where they fished mainly for the different varities of Hapuka fish. Surface fish could also be caught there like tarakihi, snapper and kingfish. However hapuka
the food of the chiefs and the priests were the main fish they hunted.
b. A significant spiritual ‘omen.’Kaumatua (elders) acknowledge Otāiti as a significant gateway to the Māori Gods mainly because they
believe that Te Motuiti o Motuiti was an island where tohunga (priest) would gather to wananga (workshop)
on karakia (prayer) and the navigation of the stars. Otāiti was the reef where they gathered fish fit for a
tohunga (priest).
c. Historical navigational point.Otāiti is a historical navigational point that was known by those who held the traditional knowledge of
navigation.
d. An area where natural science was studied (Māori Putaiao).The ancestors studied the environment, the stars, the vegetation, the winds, the currents and virtually everything there was to know about the world when they carried out wananga (workshops). The natural
science was held by the ancestors exploring the reef and its resources. This knowledge added to the
intellect that our people had and passed down to their descendents.
e. A traditional economic food source that promoted indigenous trade.Fish and fishing grounds were traded with other tribes. Some tribes traded for a fishing station at Motiti.
Patuwai also took fish which included hapuka, maomao, kingfish, crayfish, mako and other species for the
markets. Otāiti was where they fished for the fish species they could not get around the Island. Ngāti Whakahemo and Patuwai ancestors pooled monies together to purchase a vessel to take their products to
market.
f. A valued resource.Historically, culturally, traditionally and environmentally Otāiti is a valued resource that is appreciated by
Ngāti Whakahemo who regard it as a taonga tukuiho (legacy) that has been bequeathed to them by their
ancestors.
PDF Pro Tria
l
16©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
8.0 Recommendations
Culturally a foreign object that has been grounded on a significant reef does not sit well within the Maori
psychic. We are a people who have a responsibility to carry out in terms of ‘kaitiakitanga’ (guardianship) of
the marine, natural and environmental resources for future generations to come.
i. A full wreck removal from the Otāiti Reef.
ii. Removal of all the containers to reduce the risk of any further releases.
iii. Removal of all loose debris on the sea bed in and around Motiti Island.iv. Removal of the wreckage without risk to life.
PDF Pro Tria
l
17©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
9.0 Contacts
Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Inc. Name & Contact Details
Chairperson Mita Ririnui
Ph 021 541727
Resource Management Unit / Secretary Maria Horne
Ph 027 2910737
Motiti Representative Nepia Ranapia
Ph 021 0419453
Board Member Hoko Horne
Ph 027 5957709
Board Member Huriwaka Rewa
027 3935505
Board Member Sonny Ranapia027 2041935
IT / Registrations Jasmine Stoneley
021 962193
Financial Controller Opu Williams
021 1049508
PDF Pro Tria
l
18©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
Appendix 1
Maketu A150 (Te Awhe Marae) was gazetted in November 1985 to be hereby set apart for a marae for the use and benefit of Ngāti Whakahemo hapu in particular and Te Arawa people in general.
PDF Pro Tria
l
19©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
Appendix 2Glossary of Maori Words and Abbreviations
Maori English Ahi kaa Origin continuous occupationHapu Sub TribeHui Meeting Iwi Main TribeKai FoodKaitiakitanga Defined in the Resource Management Act 1991 as the exercise
of guardianship by the tangata whenua of an area in accordance with tikanga Maori in relation to natural and physical resources; and includes the ethic of stewardship
Karakia PrayerKaumatua Elder Kawa Procedures of how things are carried out.Koha Gift Koroua Elderly MaleKuia Elderly FemaleMahinga Kai Traditional food sourcesMana Whenua Defined in the Resource Management Act 1991 as customary
authority exercised by an iwi or hapu in an identified area.Manuhiri Visitors Marae Courtyard / Maori Meeting ComplexOtāiti Astrolabe ReefRūnanga Main Authority for a tribe or Sub-tribeTapu Sacred
Tangata Whenua Defined in the Resource Management Act 1991 in relation to a particular area, means the iwi, or hapu, that holds mana whenua over that area
Tangihanga / Tangi Funeral, grieving processTaonga TreasureTe Moana-A-Toi Bay of PlentyTikanga Maori customary values and practices Tohu Sign / OmenTohunga High Priest—Expert in a given fieldTupuna AncestorWaahi Tapu Defined in the Historic Places Act 1993 as a place sacred to
Maori in the traditional, spiritual, religious, ritual, or mythological sense. The term wahi tapu may however have different meanings to different iwi and hapu.
Waka Canoe Whanau FamilyWhakapapa Family Tree/LineageWhaikorero Oratory Whakatauaki ProverbWhare Kai Dining Room Wharenui Meeting House
PDF Pro Tria
l
20©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
Appendix 3
Abbreviations
CIA Cultural Impacts AssessmentCVA Cultural Values Assessment
PDF Pro Tria
l
21©All Rights are that of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whakahemo Incorporated May 2014.
Appendix 4
References & Resources
i Jaram B.K. (1999). A Profile of the Life and Times of Timi Waata Rimini. Publication Pu Kaea, Māori News.
ii The University of Auckland (2012). Making Good Decisions Workbook 6th Edition.
iii Stager, T. (2011). The Impacts of the Rena Wreck on the Mauri of Motiti. Cited www.frontiersabroad.com07 August 2013 [Online].
iv BOP Polytechnic (2013). Maps Page, Bay of Plenty Marine Library. Cited www.marinelibrary.co.nz 29 July 2013 [Online].
v Rimini, T.W. (1893). The Fall of Pukehina, Oreiwhata and Poutuia Pa, Bay of Plenty, NZ. Cited on www.jps.auckland.ac.nz [Online].
vi Ngati Whakahemo Treaty of Waitangi Claim WAI1471
vii Jaram B.K. (1999). A Profile of the Life and Times of Timi Waata Rimini. Publication Pu Kaea, Māori News.
PDF Pro Tria
l
ANNEXURE “F”
TE ARAWA TAKITAI MOANA KAUMATUA FORUM RESOLUTION TO LODGE A S 274 APPLICATION