transcript of proceedings board of inquiry new …€¦ · transcript of proceedings board of...

31 Leslie Hills Drive, Riccarton, Christchurch

ph. (03) 366-9671; fax: (03) 943-3608

e: [email protected]; w: www.adeptsts.co.nz

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

BOARD OF INQUIRY

New Zealand King Salmon Proposal

HEARING at WAIKAWA MARAE on 3 OCTOBER 2012

BOARD OF INQUIRY:

Judge Gordon Whiting (Chairperson)

Environment Commissioner Helen Beaumont (Board Member)

Mr Mark Farnsworth (Board Member)

Mr Edward Ellison (Board Member)

Mr Michael Briggs (Board Member)

952

Blenheim 03.10.12

APPEARANCES FOR THE PURPOSES OF CROSS-EXAMINATION

MR D. NOLAN, MR J. GARDNER-HOPKINS, MR J. MARRINER and

MS R. BALASINGAM for New Zealand King Salmon

5

MR P. BEVERLEY and MR D. ALLEN to assist the Board

MS K. MULLER, MS E. JAMIESON and MS S. BRADLEY for the Minister

of Conservation

10

MR W. HEAL for Sustain Our Sounds, Friends of Nelson Haven and Tasman

Bay and Nelson Underwater Club

MR S. QUINN and MR B. LUPTON for the Marlborough District Council

15

MS B. TREE for the Environmental Defence Society

MR J. IRONSIDE for the Pelorus Wildlife Sanctuaries, J&R Buchanan,

H Elkington and whānau

20

MR M. HARDY-JONES for Mr and Mrs Halstead

MS S. GREY for Pelorus Boating Club and others

MR CADDIE for the Kenepuru and Central Sounds Residents Association 25

MR C. SODERBERG

MR B. PLAISIER for Tui Nature Reserve Wildlife Park and Wildlife Trust

30

MR F. HIPPOLITE for Ngati Koata Trust Board

MS W. McGUINNESS for McGuinness Institute

MR S. BROWNING 35

MR D. BOULTON for Sustain our Sounds and Danny & Lyn Boulton and

family

MR J. BRABANT for Yachting New Zealand and Waikawa Boating Club 40

MR J. WINCHESTER for Interislander (Kiwi Rail) Limited

MS J. HADLEY for East Bay Conservation Society

45

MS K. ERTEL for Te Atiawa ki Manawhenua Te Tau Ihu Trust

MR T. BENNION for Tauhuaroa-Watson Whanau

50

Blenheim 03.10.12

LIST OF WITNESSES

<GLENICE PAINE, sworn [12.34 pm] ..................................................... 2989

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [12.43 pm] ..................................... 2991

5

<HARRY LOVE, sworn [2.07 pm] ............................................................ 2999

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [2.19 pm] ....................................... 3003

<TREVOR TAHUAROA-WATSON, sworn [3.11 pm] .......................... 3021

<EXAMINATION BY MR BENNION [3.12 pm] ........................... 3021 10


<MAUI JOHN MITCHELL, sworn [3.59 pm] ......................................... 3026

<HILLARY ANNE MITCHELL, sworn ................................................. 3026

<EXAMINATION BY MR BENNION [3.59 pm] ........................... 3026 15

<THE WITNESSES WITHDREW [4.05 pm] .................................. 3028

<LAURA BOWDLER, sworn [4.06 pm] ................................................... 3029

<EXAMINATION BY MR BENNION [4.22 pm] ........................... 3034

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [4.26 pm] ....................................... 3036 20

<ARTHUR HUNTLEY, sworn [4.27 pm] ................................................. 3036


<JOHN NORTON, affirmed [4.37 pm] ..................................................... 3038 25

<EXAMINATION BY MR BENNION [4.37 pm] ........................... 3038


<BOSUN HUNTLEY, sworn [4.54 pm] .................................................... 3045

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [4.55 pm] ....................................... 3045 30

Blenheim 03.10.12

[9.08 AM-9.41 AM POWHIRI]

[10.32 am]

JUDGE WHITING: Ka tangi te titi, ka tangi te kaka, ka tangi hou ki a hou, 5

tihei mauri ora, tena koutou katoa. Ko te mea tuatahi me whakawhetai

me whakamoemiti ki to tatou kaihanga. Ka huri ki nga matou me nga

tini aitua, haere, haere, haere hoki atu ra.

Ka hoki mai kia tatou nga kanohi ora, i nga rau rangatira ma, e nga 10

mana, e nga reo, e nga iwi o te motu, nau mai, haere mai, hoki mai, ki

Porari Whakatau, no reira, tena koutou, tena koutou, tena tatou katoa.

The shearwater cries, the parrot cries, as so do I. Greetings everyone.

First, acknowledgements and prayers to the great creator, to the losses 15

that we bear, farewell, farewell. To the living, to those gathered here,

or gust gentlemen, grand dames, to the various voices in the people of

the land, welcome, welcome.

I will now ask for the karakia. 20

KARAKIA

Symbolic ritual by the tohunga, opening our forum. Giving the

genealogy of the creation story from the several nights, carrying on 25

through the stages of the nights.

Honour and glory to the Lord, and peace on earth, and goodwill to all

people forever and ever, oh Lord, whom I cling to, my support.

30

May peace prevail upon us this day.

[10.35 am]

JUDGE WHITING: Now, I think to start proceedings we have five people for 35

the Waikawa Marae who are going to speak and I think the first one is

Tina Looms.

MS LOOMS: Ka nui te mihi kia koutou, nga mema o te Poari.

40

Warmest greeting to the members of the Board.

Evidence composed by Rita Powick, Chairperson of Waikawa Marae

Trustees and presented by Tina Looms and Bev Maata-Hart supported

by the majority of the Management Komiti of Waikawa Marae and 45

other Te Atiawa.

Blenheim 03.10.12

Ko Piripiri te maunga, ko Waitohi te awa, ko Waikawa te marae, ko Te

Atiawa te iwi. He uri tenei o Te Atiawa no Waikawa. Ko Rita Powick

taku ingoa, tena ra koutou katoa.

5

Piripiri is the mountain, Waitohi is the river, Waikawa is the marae, Te

Atiawa are the people, I am a descendent of Te Atiawa of Waikawa.

My name is Rita Powick. Greetings.

I am Te Atiawa descendant of Waikawa and my name is Rita Powick, 10

greetings to us all.

I am a member of Te Atiawa‟s Resource Management Committee and

have been involved in supporting iwi in this direction for several years.

The evidence will outline the significant role and responsibility that 15

Waikawa Marae has as a repository of cultural knowledge and iwi

identity with associated ancestral responsibility and intergenerational

obligation to safeguard and protect all that is intrinsically inherent to

us.

20

This evidence will outline these roles and responsibilities in terms of

their direct relevance to the New Zealand King Salmon proposal. This

evidence is submitted in conjunction to that presented by Alan Riwaka.

Together these are submitted in objection to the New Zealand King

Salmon proposal and are in support of other such Te Atiawa whānau, 25

hapu, iwi evidence of objection.

Marae are the heartbeat of Māori society affirming whānau, hapu and

iwi identity, validating Māori knowledge and confirming cultural

practices, relating history as lessons to strengthen, inform and guide 30

current and future generations, enabling Māori to experience the world

as Māori. Waikawa Marae is a strong example of the above, it is rich

in representations that substantiate an impressive marine history. Our

wharenui, Arapawa portrays tipuna who were and who begot are strong

seafaring and fisher people. Taonga, highlighting great traditions 35

abound on Waikawa Marae from the mighty Kupe who pursued the

wheke across the great ocean currents. Our ancestral Heke migration

that led the waka here from the north.

[10.40 am] 40

The feats of our whaling forefathers and our navigational expertise and

the representations of mataitai, seafood, particularly revered for

sustenance, for trade and for manaakitanga (hospitality).

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

Stories of the surrounding landscape add a further dimension to

confirming identity as they weave together whakapapa links, reinforce

tribal connections with its environment and affirm ones

turangawaewae, place of belonging. Waikawa Marae features an

abundance of such stories, such as the taniwha, Te Ihu Moione who, in 5

his search for the freedom of the ocean, searched through the Wairau

thus cutting the passage to Waitohi until he ended up as the landmass

that lays between Waitohi and Waikawa. Another is that of

Ngawhatukaipono, the Brothers Islands, which stand as a testament to

Kupe‟s slaying of Te Wheke-a-Muturangi and placement of his eyes as 10

sentries to the passageway of entry to Totaranui (Tory Channel).

Thus Waikawa Marae and its people are much more than a mere

physical fixture in our rohe, with the ancestral connection spiritual

association, social relationship and cultural affinity that exist between 15

us in the surrounding land and sea we are a vital part in the very fabric

of the landscape of this rohe. A marae is also a place for non-Māori in

the desire to endorse the rich bicultural fabric of Aotearoa.

Waikawa Marae is indeed a prime example of all of this as illustrated

within the marae‟s whakatauki that takes pride of place over the took, 20

Tomokanga, “mau moku mo nga iwi katoa”, “for you, for me, for all

people”, and, as expressed in the marae‟s desire, that all presenters who

wish to give evidence on the King Salmon hearings at the marae could

do so.

25

A marae has responsibilities including those of tikanga observed to

enable society to function, kaitiakitanga, participation, guardianship,

protection and of manaakitanga, care, consideration, hospitality. The

challenge is always how marae uphold such responsibilities within the

world we strive to see and be part of. The plan change proposed by the 30

applicant fails to recognise and acknowledge both the marae as a

pivotal part of the landscape and, more importantly, our people as

fundamental participants and protectors of our place.

Tikanga is intrinsic to marae, necessary to support the interrelationships 35

of its people and essential to assist in interactions with others. Without

tikanga the physical, cultural, social and spiritual norms that we live by

marae and society would be chaotic. Tikanga is about upholding the

expression of principles and standards that are important to Māori

society. Tikanga is the manifestation of rangatiratanga, iwi authority 40

and self-management that leads marae. For marae to be true to itself

and its people and carry such manifestation into wider society is always

the challenge.

Such a challenge is the deliberation around the marine environment. 45

As the iwi marae in this region, Waikawa Marae strongly upholds

Blenheim 03.10.12

Te Atiawa as mana whenua, mana moana within the Queen Charlotte

Sound, an aspect verified also within the Te Tau Ihu Waitangi Tribunal

Report. In the aim to progress as a people we are charged with

working alongside bodies such as the regional authority in the

development of plans and procedures for our rohe. Such developments 5

are not easy, always requiring us to articulate who we are and how we

tick in a way that can be understood by others.

The Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan and Regional

Policy Statement contain clear statements and guidance about how 10

tangata whenua will be recognised and provided for. To date this has

not adequately taken into account legislative to all consult of

requirements and obligations to Te Atiawa as kaitiaki of Totaranui,

Queen Charlotte Sound.

15

The development alongside the Marlborough District Council of the

Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan has seen decisions

made in consideration of the marine environment. While such decisions

do not give what we believe to be rightful expressions of our

rangatiratanga there is an acknowledgement of these current decisions 20

along with the expectation that this acknowledgement will certainly be

provided for in the near future.

In the interim Waikawa Marae rightfully expects acknowledgement of

such decisions to be adhered to by all others within the community. 25

New Zealand King Salmon‟s plan change request is contrary to this

adherence. As such the plan change proposal is an affront to iwi, hapu,

whānau and marae. It is ignorant of the physical, cultural, social and

spiritual norms that we live by and is in conflict with our expression of

iwi authority and self-management. 30

[10.45 am]

Kaitiakitaunga is the exercise of participation, guardianship and

protection within the world we live. It charges the collective with the 35

responsibility and accountability, not only for the situation we

currently, but more importantly to ensure that what is handed on to

future generations is in a better state.

MS MAATA-HART: Kia ora tatou. Ko Bev Maata-Hart. 40

My name is Beth Maata-Hart.

Kurateau is our food basket. From here comes the kai moana that our

marae is renowned for, locally, regionally, nationally and 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

internationally. This will be further expanded upon with information

that other whānau members will present to this hearing.

It is not only the provision of kai moana for sustenance that we

jealously regard, with this comes a whole matauranga (a knowledge 5

base) of iwi perspective, traditional information, cultural expertise and

customary practice.

Waikawa Marae is a vital player in the strengthening of iwi tikanga by

protecting and maintaining traditional teachings and related customary 10

practices of iwi, a role that is not taken lightly. The marae saying,

“when the tide is out the table is set”, is reflective of the riches that is

provided from our waters. Any demise of such and the consequential

loss of associated cultural knowledge are aspects that the marae

struggles with. 15

As more and more developments alter the landscape it becomes more

difficult to maintain associated cultural knowledge as an intrinsic way

of life. The poupou, the tukutuku, the carvings, the kowhaiwhai (the

painted rafters) within Waikawa Marae‟s wharenui, Arapawa, are 20

important representations of a people and a way of life as well as

stories that are passed down to keep iwi identities strong.

The whare talks of necessity to ensure that iwi knowledge and skills are

maintained, to ensure iwi survive as iwi. The ability to relate these 25

messages to present and future generations is one that future

developments have no right to impact upon to the extent it becomes a

story to tell and not one to love.

We oppose any potential impact that may risk the relationship we wish 30

to exercise within our marine environment and that may create any

cultural loss for our people. The mana (prestige) of an iwi or of a marae

is measured upon the ability to manaaki manuhiri, to care for visitors.

It‟s a cultural requirement that visitors be extolled with the utmost in

hospitality, including the provision of the best kai which is special and 35

particularly to the marae and its locality. To be able to provide such

cause the greatest compliment upon the iwi and elevates honour upon

the marae. The significance of this and the prowess with which we

carry it out is reflected within our tribal whakatauki, “Ko to Te Atiawa,

ko Tahuaroa” “Te Atiawa rich in food resources, bountiful hosts.” 40

Waikawa Marae has had the honour and presence of many individuals,

groups and organisations over the years. This has included local,

regional, national and international representation. Functions have

included events such as family gatherings, celebrations, birthdays, 45

weddings, graduations, wananga, craft events, language and tikanga

Blenheim 03.10.12

classes, health and education seminars, weaving and carving classes,

kaumatua gatherings, kohanga reo events, workshops and

demonstrations, concerts, visits from international and national

dignitaries, working bees, school visits, fishing hui, iwi meetings,

government hui and many many more. 5

At all times it has been the honour and responsibility of Waikawa

Marae to extend its manaakitanga to all at such occasions.

Manaakitanga is an interchange, a two-way relationship. Certainly the

host expends all to show care, warmth and generosity to visitors and 10

does so within the physical, spiritual, social and cultural norms within

which it operates. However, there is also the reciprocal responsibility

of the visitor to respect such hospitality and behave with the example

outlaid similar to the saying, “when in Rome do as the Romans”.

New Zealand King Salmon has breached such a relationship. It has 15

neither sought to enquire as the manaakitanga expended by Waikawa

Marae nor responded appropriately as a party entering into the marae‟s

tribal domain.

[10.50 am] 20

Conclusion. Waikawa Marae has an ancestral responsibility and

intergenerational obligation to protect all that is important to us.

Nowhere else is this exposed as profoundly as it is on the marae within

whaikorero, karanga and waiata. With the formation of the marae, its 25

atea, wharenui, wharekai, kaumatua flats, kohanga reo. Within its

carvings, tukutuku, kowhaiwhai. Within the stories told, not as a mere

history lesson but as a way of life, for information, education, cultural

identity and iwi prowess to strengthen our way of life.

30

Kurateau is the lifeline for our marae. Concerns of anything that

impact upon the recognition and provision of our relationship with our

ancestral lands, waters and other taonga fails to recognise the values

that are important to us, including the ability to provide manaakitanga,

fails to recognise our role as kaitiaki in the coastal marine area and fails 35

to recognise and provide for our continued access to and use of

traditional coastal resources are paramount reasons for our objection to

the New Zealand King Salmon proposal. No reira, tena koutou katoa.

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora. Mr Alan Riwaka. 40

MR RIWAKA: Tena koutou. He honoria kororia ki te Atua, he maungarongo

ki te whenua, he whakairo pai ki nga tangata katoa, tihei mauri ora.

Te mihi tuatahi ki to tatou matua i te rangi, kui a te timatanga, kui a te 45

mutunga, a kororia ki te matua, te tama, me te wairua tapu. A, tena

Blenheim 03.10.12

koutou nga rangatira, a kei te mihi kia koutou, tena koe Eruera, council,

Commissioner Briggs, tenei te mihi kia koutou.

Greetings. Honour and glory to the Lord, peace on earth and goodwill

to all people. Firstly, acknowledgements to the great creator for the 5

commencement and conclusion of all things – glory to the father, the

son and the holy spirit. Greetings to the members of the committee,

greetings to you Edward Ellison, Commissioner Briggs, greetings.

I stand here humbly. 10

Ae tuwhaka i te ana, my name is Alan Riwaka. My father is William

Tutearoho Riwaka and my mother is Agnes Takioramatana. My

grandfather is Thomas Riwaka and my grandmother is Nancy

Whanganui Watson. The tipuna from who I derive my rights and 15

interests into Tau Ihu o Te Waka a Maui is through my tipuna, Rihari

Tahuaroa who is above the doorway as you come into this wharenui,

that‟s our tipuna.

My maunga, a Taranaki and Piripiri, Raukawa are the waters that 20

sustain our people. Waitohi is my river and Arapawa is the sacred

island of our people. I belong to Puketapu hapu and my iwi

is Te Atiawa, my marae is Waikawa.

The tipuna of this wharenui is Tamarau Te Heketanga-a-Rangi which 25

sits behind the tepu up here. Tamarau came down from the heavens

and embraced Rongoueroa and from this came our ancestor Awanui-a-

Rangi, the eponymous ancestor of the Atiawa people.

Arapawa is the name of our whare, it is of great spiritual significance to 30

us for it embodies our people, past and present, and allows us to

maintain our Te Atiawa taonga, our customs and practices developed

and nurtured over many generations.

This is the place of discussion and debate, to celebrate, to welcome the 35

living and to bid farewell to those who have passed on. Arapawa is our

wharekarakia where we pray to God.

Our whare is surrounded by our kohanga reo, our kuia and kaumatua

complex, our iwi trust, Te Atiawa Mana Whenua ki Te Tau Ihu Trust, 40

and training centre. Waikawa Marae is the hub for all things Māori in

this rohe. The kawa and the whenua on which our marae complex

stands is undeniably Te Atiawa. Waikawa Marae lies at the heart of

Te Atiawa identity. However, this marae is for all people. As we say

in our whakatauki, “Mau moku mo nga iwi katoa”, “for you, for me 45

and for all people”.

Blenheim 03.10.12

[10.55 am]

There are many hands, Māori and Pakeha that have helped to build our

marae. But who is the evidence on behalf of? The evidence I give 5

today is on behalf of Waikawa Marae.

What is the nature of the evidence? In particular I will speak about the

importance of Kurateau to our iwi and to our marae, and secondly the

importance of Pokoanamahanga. 10

The importance of Kurateau. Kurateau is important because it forms

part of the customs and traditions of Te Atiawa and the land and

seascape. One of our traditions is linked to the name of our wharenui,

Arapawa. The name Arapawa derives its origins from the downward 15

blow that killed the giant octopus, Te Wheke o Muturangi. According

to Te Atiawa tradition, Muturangi and Kupe had quarrelled over a

fishing incident and as a consequence Kupe set out from Hawaiki to

kill Te Wheke.

20

The chase stretched across the oceans between Hawaiki and Aotearoa

until eventually Te Wheke was cornered and Kurateau and killed at a

place called Whekenui, a short distance from Ngamahau Bay and

Kurateau. Kurateau derived its name from the blood that flowed from

Te Wheke. Te Wheke o Muturangi is depicted in the whakairo at the 25

front of our whare.

Two other places in Kurateau owe their origins to our great ancestor

Kupe. Te Uirakarapa (The Lightening Flash) is a shiny rock in

Kurateau and is said to denote the flash of the axe that killed Te Wheke 30

o Muturangi. Te Kaka o te Toki o Kupe is a rock formation in

Kurateau and is said to be the handle of Kupe‟s axe. Kupe also named

a number of other places in Totaranui following the event concerning

Te Wheke.

35

Kurateau is also important because of Te Atiawa settlement. The

principal pa sites in Kurateau (Tory Channel) were situated at Okukari

and Te Awaiti. There were many smaller villages scattered along the

shores of Kurateau, some of which were occupied seasonally for

fishing. 40

Te Atiawa occupied Whekenui, Te Pangu, Ngaruru, Kaihinu,

Wiriwaka, Te Iro, Hitaua, Maraetai and other smaller places. There are

a number of urupa along the shores of Kurateau, Okukari, Te Awaiti,

Te Weuweu, Kaihinu, Mo-oi-o, Hitaua are just a few. There are also 45

urupa and wahi tapu that are associated with pre-Te Atiawa settlement

Blenheim 03.10.12

of Totaranui for the likes of our whānaunga, ā Rangitane, Ngati Kuri ā

tena koutou.

Archaeological surveying of Kurateau has identified numerous sites

and artefacts. My brother-in-law Gary Buchanan who is now deceased 5

knew many of these places. My relations Mike Taylor and Chris Love

are also very knowledgeable about these things as well as a Pakeha

man by the name of Reg Nicholl.

There was a large Te Atiawa population residing in Kurateau during 10

the period of the 1840s. When Reverend Octavius Hadfield visited the

Sounds throughout much of the 1840s he often mentioned the 300 and

more Te Atiawa that were attending his sermons at Okukari. This was

the largest chapel in Kurateau although there were many others situated

at Whekenui, Te Awaiti, Puhi and small places situated between Oyster 15

Bay and Te Pangu Bay.

In 1856 native reserves were set aside for Te Atiawa. Seven were set

up in Kurateau. They included Okukari, Whekenui, Te Awaiti, Te

Pangu, Ngaruru, Te Iro and Hitaua. Much of this land is still owned by 20

our people.

One of the reasons why Te Atiawa decided to settle in the Sounds was

largely connected to the fishery resources and the opportunities for

trade. Colonel William Wakefield visited the Sounds in 1839 and he 25

noted the abundance of the fishery resources within Kurateau. He also

mentioned that Te Atiawa people were involved in whaling and trading

fish. Our grandparents and parents continued whaling until it closed in

1964 and some Te Atiawa families continued to be involved in the

fishing industry and providing for the needs of our whānau, hapu, and 30

marae.

[11.00 am]

Some of our kaumatua who were involved in the whaling industry now 35

spend their time counting them through their binoculars as they swim

past the entrance of Kurateau during their migration.

Since the 1970s our people have become increasingly concerned about

the sustainability of our fishing resources in Kurateau. Back then there 40

were major concerns over the commercialisation of the kina fishery and

the amount of kina being removed from Kurateau.

During the 1980s, 90s massive kina catches by commercial fishers

were reported and by the early 2000s kina and paua stocks within 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

Kurateau had plummeted to all time low. As a result commercial

fishing ceased because it was no longer economic.

If this wasn‟t enough we also had the fast ferries come into the Sounds.

They caused more damage in one month than any other events since 5

Maui fished up the South Island. Divers will tell you that Kurateau has

never really recovered from these events. The worse thing to have

happened is the habitat was thrown above the high water mark where it

was no longer available as habitat for our juvenile paua. I saw this

happen with my own eyes, very large boulders tossed above the high 10

water mark.

Despite these happenings and the exposure of koiwi through erosion

the Court ruled in favour of the fast ferries as a matter of national

importance. It was one of the worst decisions that have ever been made 15

in the management of our Sounds. In the end the Council came around

but it was by then a case too little, too late, the damage had been done.

These fast ferries have come and caused harm to Kurateau and now

they have gone and left us with what is left.

20

One of our people‟s responses to stock decline, fast ferries and

increasing pressures from land development has been to turn Kurateau

into a mataitai reserve. Before the Sealord deal was signed off in 1992,

and as part of the government and iwi consultation, our people told the

government officials and our Māori advocates that we wanted Kurateau 25

turned into a mataitai reserve so it could be protected forever. We are

all getting older and we still haven‟t got there.

And I need to acknowledge Commissioner Briggs, I know that through

the 90s and your time as a councillor, we had the opportunity to present 30

to you, on many occasions, the importance of Kurateau and all of those

reasons as to why we need to protect it. We are still going and we are

still trying to achieve that protection that our tipuna actually set

forward for us. So tena koe, Commissioner Briggs. More than

20 years later we are still striving to achieve this aspiration. Our 35

kaitiaki will continue that work in this area.

The proposed site at Ngamahau. I am familiar with the proposed site.

First of all the farm sits within Kurateau, which is the most important

mahinga kai, or food basket, for our people. 40

Secondly, Ngamahau sits within the top half of Kurateau which

produces the best quality kina, rock lobster, shellfish and a range of

important finfish.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

Thirdly, immediately to the north of Ngamahau is Tangi Point. I have

been diving in this and other places around Kurateau for the last

30 years. The naming of this mahinga kai is self-explanatory and it is

dived only at times when there are tangihanga.

5

When we harvest kina from this place our divers work the beds and are

selective about what they take. Our practices have been taught to us by

our older divers and fishers, such as John Bunt, Isaac Love and Bosun

Huntly.

10

The fact that these beds surrounding Tangi Point are still there after

30 years is proof that our management practices have worked. It is

probably also because we keep the identification of many of our

mahinga kai amongst ourselves.

15

And I must say, you know, it is difficult for us, people who have been

diving in this area and looking after our marae for so many areas, to

come into this sort of a forum and to actually identify these places.

These are like our wahi tapu, we don‟t like giving them out. I guess at

the end of the day we‟re pressured into doing it because if we say 20

nothing then things that perhaps we don‟t like to see will happen. So

very important for us but at the same time we don‟t want the world to

know where we get all our kai because it could impact our marae.

[11.05 am] 25

It would be no exaggeration to say several thousand sacks have been

taken from this area over the time I have dived. I have had my fair

share of them on my boat. In 2000 I was taking about 20 tonne of kina

from Kurateau to support the customs and traditions of our iwi, our 30

hapu, our marae and our whānau. In the same year I know my

whānaunga, Isaac Love was taking just as much as me and then there

are my other whānaunga such as John Boy McGregor and Bosun

Huntly. These people have always been the principal providers of kai

moana for our people, hapu, whānau and marae, and they still are. I 35

remember Bosun when I was a kid. Every now and then he used to

drop us off a sack of kina on his way home.

My cousins Jimmy Taylor and Dave Koos (ph 1.31) used to dive with

me for the marae all the time. Like me we had to move away to get 40

work.

To the south of Ngamahau Bay is Deep Bay. This bay contains the

largest cockles to be found in Totaranui. These beds are unique and are

fished on very special occasions. Successive District and Regional 45

Councils have over the years allowed the destruction of our major

Blenheim 03.10.12

cockle beds in Totaranui. For example, the Waitohi wetlands in Picton

has been reclaimed. The Waikawa wetlands and cockle beds at

Waikawa were destroyed for a marina and that‟s the marina just over

here, one of our main mahinga kai areas around Waikawa. And

Shakespeare Bay was destroyed for the purpose of a deep-water port. 5

All of this has been done in the name of progress but to the detriment

of our people and our kai moana. These beds need to be protected.

And if I can just say that, you know, having had some involvement

with a lot of these activities over the last 20, 30 or more years, certainly 10

going back to the „80s, many of our people have been promised jobs,

they‟ve been promised all sorts of opportunities but we are still yet to

realise those sorts of things, but I guess the point I make is the price

that we have paid as our iwi, as our people has been massive in terms

of our kai moana throughout Totaranui. 15

Between Ngamahau and Deep Bay our people also harvest paua and

there are kina beds that run out from the middle of the bay and in the

area proposed as a farm our people set their nets. Anthony Bunt is an

expert fisherman and descents from one of the families that have 20

maintained our customs, traditions, associations with Tangaroa and in

fact we still have some of our families that are residing in Kurateau and

maintain our ahi kaa in that area. Anthony has better knowledge than

me of the area around Ngamahau Bay. He has more fishing knowledge

than me full stop. 25

If we go down the other end of Kurateau, down in the Dieffenbach end,

the two farms proposed at the southern entrance of Kurateau are also

over the top of important recreational fishing areas. I am sure your

committee will already be aware of this. It also appears that the 30

proposed two farms will put an obstacle in the pathway of traffic

moving up and down the sounds.

When our boats are travelling up at this side of Arapawa and I‟ve been

travelling up and down in my boat for many years, particularly on our 35

smaller vessels in a north-west, they must be extremely careful. It can

get very ugly out there sometimes and these farms could pose an added

history. And I know for my whānau often we‟re bringing up our

tamariki, our mothers, our parents so we need to be careful. We need to

think about these things in terms of how we get around Totaranui in our 40

waka.

To the southern ends of these farms is the entrance to Kurateau, the

area we consider our food basket. In the area around Ruaomoko are

important paua and kina beds that are fished for customary purposes. 45

These beds and those beds which are on the Dieffenbach side of the

Blenheim 03.10.12

channel are particularly important to our whānau who have slow boats.

It could take a good hour to Kaitira. For some it comes down to

affordability.

[11.10 am] 5

Now moving to Anamahanga (Port Gore). I am familiar with

Anamahanga. This is part of our rohe. The land is derived through

Ngati Hinetui, a sub tribe of Ngati Mutunga, and that‟s rangatira,

Eruera‟s tipuna. Our relatives from Ngati Apa and Ngati Kuia reside on 10

these lands and maintain the fires.

I think my cousin Ashley Love has a house on his land. The Smith

whānau reside there and have done so for many generations. When I

was a boy I used to go down to Anamahanga for the school holidays 15

with my whānaunga, Raymond Smith. We used to pull his uncle‟s nets

up, retrieve the fish and then sell them back to him for so much a

pound. His Uncle Tom never did find out.

I spent much time diving in Port Gore during the 80s and 90s. My 20

whānau have land on the northern entrance side of Arapawa and from

there it is not a great distance to travel to Port Gore to get rock lobster

to feed our families. The area we used to go to is immediately inward

of the proposed farm. I have not much been there in the area for a

while but my cousins still go there. My whānaunga Raymond Smith 25

taught me about this place.

The fisheries are important for sustaining our people who reside in Port

Gore and ensuring our customs and traditions are maintained.

Raymond and his brother John will have more intimate knowledge of 30

the kai moana beds than me.

In my closing comments I would just like to say I give this evidence

with the knowledge that many of my iwi, many of the hau kainga

oppose the King Salmon application. I understand that 75 percent of 35

those present at an iwi hui, at this whare, supported a resolution to

oppose the salmon farm proposal, especially in Kurateau. I am fully

aware of the Marae‟s position on this matter and I support them. In

terms of our tikanga, neither the front or the back is stronger than the

other. They are side by side, not one on top of the other. 40

This is captured in our whakatauki, “Ka pai ki mua, ka pai ki muri, ka

pai nga mea katoa”.

Things are okay at the front, they’ll be okay in the back. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

The other thing to remember is the hau kainga which are our home

people. They make the decisions on our marae and within our rohe, it

is the ahi ka. Kurateau the most important food basket in Te Tau Ihu, it

needs to be protected. In particular the kai moana beds between Tangi

Point and Deep Bay are extremely important for supporting tangihanga 5

and the customs and traditions of our people.

Ā na reira … [Māori content 3.23], a ka ma hui tenei waka taua kia

koutou, a ko nga honohonotanga a iwi, a hapu, a whānau, e waka pou

ma tia ana te hono nga o nga matua tipuna me o ratou uri whakatipu, a 10

neira, a tena koutou, a tena koutou, tena koutou katoa.

So I conclude here, and we just clarify the connection between the hapu

iwi and families with their ancestors. Thank you.

15

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora, yes, kia ora Mr Riwaka. I understand that

Ms Bev Maata-Hart is going to give a presentation on her own behalf.

MS MAATA-HART: Tena ra koutou katoa, nga mema o te Poari… [Māori

content 4.09] and a member of the Waikawa Marae Management 20

Komiti. [Māori content 4.26]. We are the guardians, we are the people

whose job it is to protect our resources.

Greetings members of the Board. I am a descendent of Maata Tenihi

and James Everly. To me the greatest thing to Māori is the 25

guardianship.

The responsibility of kaitiakitanga (guardianship) is handed down from

our tipuna and is also guaranteed to us under Article 2 of the Treaty of

Waitangi. This is a serious, very serious obligation for us. Ko te Kuini 30

o Ingarangi … [Māori content 5.00].

Queen of England will agree to the Chiefs and the hapu and all the

people, their tinorangatiratanga of their lands, their homes and of their

treasures. 35

[11.15 am]

So we were guaranteed in Article 2 that the things which we – are dear

to us would be treasured and would be protected. 40

For us who live here there‟s an added response – the sense of

responsibility weighs very heavily on us as iwi, we take this as a very

serious responsibility that we have, our kaitiakitanga. For us who live

there, there‟s an added responsibility to ensure that these treasures of 45

the Sounds are preserved for our future generations.

Blenheim 03.10.12

The Ministry for the Environment website questions, “how will our

activities of today affect our future so that the environment does not

suffer?” We cannot take the risk of the addition of more salmon farms

to our area, to the Sounds, because neither you nor I can know the 5

effect of what those salmon farms will have on the future for us, we do

not know that.

The website further states that we as locals and we know our

environment and we know – and what needs to be protected – we are 10

the guardians, we are the people who know our local treasures and

what we want to have protected. We therefore strongly oppose this

application for a plan change.

The Resource Management Act recognises and provides for the 15

relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their

ancestral lands, wahi tapu and their traditional food gathering sites.

Traditional Māori guardianship over kai moana is also guaranteed

under the Treaty.

20

The principles of the Treaty are to be taken into account in the

management of natural resources and that is from the website from the

Resource Management Act. Salmon farms, they are a foreign species to

this area, they feed or they are raised on foreign food. They are a direct

threat to our natural resources. In achieving the purpose of this Act, 25

especially relevant to us here, protection of our natural resources must

take into account the Treaty of Waitangi.

As members of the management committee for Waikawa Marae and

with the significant responsibility of kaitiakitanga and guarding our 30

Marlborough Sounds for our future generations, the majority of us very

strongly oppose the plan change that will allow the development of

more salmon farms in our Sounds.

No reira, whakatakoto te manawa kia koutou nga mema o te Poari. Kia 35

whakarongo ae ki tau matou mamae, we ask you please, we challenge

you to listen to the sadness and the grief that we have over this issue.

So we lay down the challenge to you, the members of this Board, to

listen to our concerns. 40

Nga mihi kia koutou, mo to whakarongo kia matou, no reira, tena ra

koutou katoa.

And I would like to thank you for listening to us. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora. Mr Pio Riwaka-Herbert.

MS……….: Paia.

JUDGE WHITING: Sorry, Ms Paia Riwaka-Herbert. 5

MS RIWAKA-HERBERT: Tena koutou katoa, ki nga mema o te Poari.

[Māori content 4.02]

Greetings members of the Board. I warmly greet you, to the visitors 10

and to the people of te waka ao Māori, to the families I greet you.

Piripiri is the mountain, Arapawa is the sacred isle, Raukawa is the

seas, Waikawa is the marae. My name is Pia Riawaka-Herbert.

Ko Paia Riwaka-Herbert taku ingoa. I stand here to read on behalf of 15

my aunt Linda Ohia, her submission to you.

MS RIWAKA-HERBERT: [Māori content 4.38] Ko Linda Ohia Niriwaka

taku ingoa, tena koutou.

20

Te Atiawa is my people, arapawa is the sacred isle, Piripiri is the

mountain, Waitohe is the river, Waikawa is the marae, Linda Ohia

Niriwaka is my name. Greetings.

I strongly object to any form of marine farming in the Marlborough 25

Sounds, especially the proposal by New Zealand King Salmon

Company Ltd. King Salmon already own several farms in the Sounds

and to apply for more is an act of insatiable greed. The Sounds is the

food source of its local iwi, Te Atiawa and all people who enjoy the

freedom of being able to access all its rich resources. 30

[11.20 am]

I feel that this proverb is appropriate at this time, “A bird in the hand is

worth two in the bush”. To us, as tangata whenua, we want to be able to 35

be good stewards of what we already have.

I have strong reservations regarding claims made by King Salmon in

their supporting documentation at the risk of losing what we already

have. The proposal to privatise public open space for 34 years, to me, 40

in reality means “forever more”, as they also after 34 years want a

further right of renewal to an overseas company. Next, they may want a

lease in perpetuity and that does mean “forever more”.

Blenheim 03.10.12

King Salmon‟s proposal is again another contravention of the

principles, values and spirit of the Treaty of Waitangi and the

Foreshore and Seabed Bill.

Māori are known to eat much of our kai moana raw, kina, paua, 5

mussels etc. And the impact of antifoul discharge fallout etc, means

sickness and possible death to people, fish, shellfish, the seashore, the

landscape and the marine habitat.

It‟s a sad day today that Te Atiawa trustees have chosen to ignore the 10

will and clear direction given by Te Atiawa iwi to oppose the

applications made by King Salmon. While trustees state that there are

3,000 iwi members throughout the world, our tikanga dictates that it is

the ahi ka, te hau kainga (The people who light the fires), those who

live here who have the responsibility to ensure the protection, the 15

preservation and sustainability of the environment - - -

MR……….: Kia ora.

MS RIWAKA-HERBERT:- - - and resources within Totaranui (Queen 20

Charlotte Sound) and Kurateau (Tory Channel) for all future

generations.

In conclusion, this is my turangawaewae (place to stand), my home,

my heart, as it was for my parents and their parents before them. 25

King Salmon are here today and will be gone tomorrow, but the

descendants of Te Atiawa will remain forever.

I have had the privilege of partaking in the bountiful, abundant 30

treasures of the Marlborough Sounds that the Marlborough Sounds

provides me with. Can I leave this for my children and mokopuna?

No reira, tena tatou katoa.

35

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora. And finally, Mr Anthony Bunt.

MR BUNT: Kia ora.

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora, Mr Bunt. 40

MR BUNT: I‟d like to present some photos to the Board if I may, based on

some of our older histories. Kia ora, the first photo with the guy sitting

down on the hill, the closest to me, grandfather, John Huntley and for

the purposes of this, the ones behind it, descendants, Toms 45

descendants, the guy directly behind him that you can‟t quite see with

Blenheim 03.10.12

the hat on, is my great grandfather – great great grandfather

William Henry Toms.

[11.25 am]

5

So my great-grandfather there is tangata whenua to here. So his

whakapapa is old histories. The Toms are the manawhenua so they are

the conquerors of that land. Where my grandfather is sitting there is

where the conquest started at the entrance at Tory Channel.

10

The Toms family there are the descendants of Joseph Toms, a direct

Treaty descendant. He married Tia Korikiriki and she is the daughter

of Nohurua. Now, in the photo with Te Awaiti Bay on the left, you

will see a house on the corner of the photo there. That house, the front

part of it is the house of Nuhurua. And the extensions around it have 15

come from later generations. So my Nana Toms, she was born there in

Nuhurua‟s house. And the house to the right of it is the house we have

today, and that is where she was brought up in.

If we go across further to the other houses there and they are family 20

houses again, they are Keenan and Norton houses. So our whakapapa

on the Toms side again is through the Keenans in that bay and half that

bay is Keenan land and it was born out of the conquests again of Tama

Iwa and William Henry Keenan married Hikimapua Takini, that‟s

Glenys‟ whānau. Most of our whānau is here and we pay tribute to the 25

Loves and the Nortons here as well. They are all part of that land in

that bay.

If we look back at that first photo and we talked about – I am sorry,

Alan‟s got a note here, Nohurua was one of the ariki for Ngati Toa. He 30

was a priest, a blesser. I was going back to the photos and I forgot,

sorry.

If we look at those photos at the entrance again, there is really two new

waves there. Despite having said there is two old, you know, there is 35

old and new mana whenua, mana wana, there is a new generation there.

My grandfather was one of the whalers in the modern terms and my

great-grandparents behind them were the rowboat whalers. The last of

the rowboat whalers.

40

If we go back into the centre of Te Awaiti Bay you will see a rowboat.

A rowboat, that was the last rowboat there. The last rowboat, the last

time they got a whale was as Dieffenbach with the Toms and the

Nortons, it would be my great-grandfather, Jack Norton, was a

headsman for it. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

So that is a bit of a brief. In the background of that one where the guys

are is Ngamahau Bay just up in the corner.

If we look at the other photo with the whale chaser, and that is my

grandfather, John Huntly, shooting, and he is shooting a whale there, I 5

think it was - it was the akeak gun, oh, sorry, a gun, a harpoon. But

that is what they were akeak guns. The last whale he shot was off

Ta White, that‟s where he lived at the time with my grandmother.

[11.30 am] 10

That boat and that gun, the bolt blew out and hit his face, so a few days

later he ended up dying, but that happened outside Tahawai‟s and if we

look in the right of that photo Tawai you can‟t quite see the hill, but the

hill was named Puponga after our ancestor, William Henry Keenan. 15

But also has in its old whakapapa, is a tribute to the Hump Back whales

and the whales that go up through the Sounds there, and the turning

point is between Te Awaiti or just above Te Awiti where he‟d shot that

whale. So that‟s just a brief there.

20

So I‟d just like to move into myself a little bit, a bit about myself. After

the whaling really was commercial fishing took off and our family‟s

done all the commercial fishing, and I ended up getting a catch history

through our quota system. But we didn‟t qualify – I didn‟t actually

qualify because the moratorium had come in the late „70s, so there was 25

a special system they put through – three of us in New Zealand got

them, and mine was one of them, one at the bottom, one at the top.

Mine was based on my whakapapa and my ahi ka, my long history with

the bay, with the Sounds.

30

So I‟ll move into the rest of my stuff. While Kurateau is now more

commonly referred to as the Tory Channel, our old history can expand

on it a little bit more. Kurateau is the krill, and if we look at the krill

and you heard Alan talking about the blood, well if we think of Tory

Channel as a tentacle of the wheke, that krill is the vein that‟s going 35

through it. And you heard Alan talk about where the axe was struck up

at Kura - Wirikapara, with the next blow was in Tahawai and refers

really to our krill. So the krill is the blood and the blood is – the only

place that it drifts ashore in thickness is Te Awaiti.

40

So in translation this krill pulls in the eddies of the bay and the outer

part of the next bay, and as the bay shallows this forces the krill to the

surface and the krill can stay in the bay for several days, and then a

light southerly air will bring it ashore.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

So what we‟re saying there is, this is one area that accumulates from

the Sounds, from the channel, and things come ashore. So what we‟re

saying is there‟s always the possibility that if there were viruses or

diseases to come across in any of these new farms that we would

probably be one of the first places to get it, based on this. 5

Now if we go back through our days and a lot of our whaling was done

in the Sounds, if they couldn‟t get the whale ashore, and the tides and it

sounded, it would end up drifting out into the straits, and then usually

be picked up off Jordy Rocks and around Island Bay on the south side. 10

This happens too with any boats that broke away from Te Awiti or the

bay next door. You could usually go and have a look down the Jody‟s,

Island Bay and there‟s a good chance that you may find them down

there. So that‟s effectively saying that‟s where our currents flow.

15

So if there were any currents to flow, any diseases we‟re saying will –

there‟s a possibility that, you know, it‟s going to hit Te Awaiti then it

may hit Island Bay. And now Island Bay for us, we have our titi birds

there, we have an island there, our iwi does, and one day, who knows,

we may decide to put a reserve or whatever there. The south of outer 20

ends is the Sounds – the straits is part of our kai moana gathering areas.

[11.35 am]

So Alan‟s already explained around the mouth of the channel and up to 25

Turi Kapara‟s, our system, it‟s our rich ecosystem. It is flushed by

Cook Strait Canyon, it is hot and cold waters. It has plenty of

oxygenated water, that‟s why it‟s rich, that‟s why it‟s healthy. It brings

everything there.

30

The channel contains many of our seasonal patterns for our fisheries,

such as Moki, Terakihi, and Butterfish, Kawai, and it really shows

itself when our manu or our great krill feed, our normal red krill,

whitebait and its equivalents, accumulate in the channel. This is natural

spawning pieces that happen in ecosystem. Our titi birds come through 35

there, so our birds and our islands that – we‟ve got our Mutton birds

out in the straits. Part of that feeding ground is Tory Channel. And you

can see these birds feeding in the kelp, our fish feed in the kelps.

These find the food of – the foundation of the food, which many of the 40

species even flying through the Sounds and the entrance, as I said. Now

part of that group is the kina – I‟m going to speak a little bit about our

kina, and really it should be dad speaking but he‟s not here. Part of that

group of spawn that we talked about, the manu and the krill, is the kina,

the kina spawn, and it contains – when it spawns, it spawns millions 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

and millions of embryo or larvae. Now these become prey to other

animals so they are contributing hugely in our ecosystem.

So I‟ll move into a – basically what dad‟s talking about. Our kina is a

highly valued customary requirement, as Alan said before, and 5

everyone said. We‟re renowned for big and beautiful kina, it‟s the place

for kina to come. It‟s like titi birds to Bluff. It‟s like whales to

Kaikoura, whitebait to the West Coast, mussels to Pelorus. That is ours.

I suspect the threat to anyone of these species would be highly rebuffed 10

and challenged by those locals. We see this outer farming proposal as

an invasion, that‟s the one around Ngamahau I‟m talking about, into

our highly valued species. We have had a huge family interest in the

kina fishery and it‟s gone on for generations, from the day of the

conquest right through to today. So from both the commercial, the 15

customary perspective, that‟s been us.

Many years ago my father explained how the fishery worked and how

it replenishes itself. He explained that the kina spawn, when the kina

spawn they come to the surface and move round with the tides. These 20

kina we‟re talking about are spawning in Okukari at the head of the bay

– the channel entrance, and Whekenui. They change with the – in the

peak conditions, over the phase of the moon and on a change of a tide,

usually a stiff southerly will bring them on.

25

Our primary nursery is, as I said, is Okukari and Whekenui Bays, and

this is in line with our ancient whakapapa, our old whakapapa would

tell us that. I don‟t know how you call it - I don‟t know how you call it,

it‟s not the stomach but the placenta I guess, is in Whekenui, and it‟s

where all our baby – a lot of our baby things start out, baby octopus, 30

our Paua, a lot of our fish start in there, and grow out from there.

[11.40 am]

Dad estimated that it took around 18 months from an egg cup size to a 35

harvestable size for the kinas, which were round the palm size of your

hand. Recent science studies confirm what dad‟s monitoring was.

Science indicates that kina of up to 200 ml may take up to 50 years and

float in larvae form and are free swimming from four to six weeks. Dad

reckoned that it didn‟t really take that long, and the spawning not 40

necessarily took four to six weeks, that‟s his view, and he‟s basing it on

the richness of the material that they had to eat.

So anyway, these free forming larvae are free swimming for four to six

weeks, and fed on micro plants, and from those two bays, and Te 45

Awaiti, the channel, and the outer straits is replenished. So that‟s our

Blenheim 03.10.12

spawning area, and it feeds it up like a tentacle through the rest of the

place. We say the outer strait too, based on our – what I‟ve just said to

you with the krill and Te Awaiti. You can see that our kina down in the

outer straits quite likely comes from there. Even though they spawn out

there themselves, there‟s a contribution factor from Okukari, Tory 5

Channel.

The kina‟s been an inter-generational fishery, it‟s been passed down

over many generations. Alan‟s spoken to you about the mataitai. Dad‟s

been a big supporter and put a lot of paperwork over the years into our 10

fishery. Kina‟s sustained many generations for several families from Te

Awaiti, and I‟d just ask that several generations, Norton‟s, Hefley‟s,

Love's, plenty – when I say sustain that‟s in earning a living out of it as

well.

15

Dredging or spearing kina was a common practice at home and mum

was quite good at that. This fishery feeds the Marlborough iwi and

continues to do so. Indeed it services around 13 marae in the top of the

south area. So, you know, it is important part. We think that it‟s of

national importance, not national significance, but national importance. 20

For many years our iwi/whānau have been pushing to get this fishery

properly managed. And, you know, if we look up around Motukina

Point, opposite Turikapara, the loose translation of Motukina is “home

of the kina”. Now we haven‟t had kina there for a long time, and it‟s a 25

flat area, it‟s easy to get, everyone could harvest it, free driving or

sparing. It‟s an area that has not recovered and may be those salmon

farms have contributed to that effect, maybe.

I understand that those Chinook are quite ferocious eaters and will eat 30

anything. We understand that certain stages of that salmon feed, salmon

feed on planktonic diatoms, etcetera, so kelps and jellyfish and little

things. The point is that enabling another farm to compete for precious

resources in an area that contains tidal drifting kina larvae is an

unnecessary risk, because these kina, when they start settling, may 35

settle on the nets or whatever and become prey to cleaning, you know.

When they‟re cleaned, or stop the cycle.

So even though we mightn‟t have big patches of kina where that farm

is, they may be places that over that period of a month, four weeks, six 40

weeks, the fish are circulating while they‟re growing, and I think that‟s

important.

[11.45 am]

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

In terms of science development, kina are one of the few invertebrates

on our branch of the evolutionary tree, and have over 7,000 genes

similar to ours. Science now has a complete map of their DNA and

kina is being increasingly used in science research because the kina

develops externally and are nearly transparent, kina are ideal for 5

observing the early stages of development. Their life cycling up to the

hardening of the shell can be viewed in a microscope with a huge

amount happening in the first 24 hours.

They can be reproduced for research purposes faster than any other 10

animals, and practically produce unlimited amounts of material for the

researchers.

Current research includes Alzheimer‟s, Parkinson and Muscular

Dystrophy, and yesterday there was a PC released on a skin hardening 15

or aging by the science departments. They may even hold the cure to

some of those diseases.

It looks like kina will play a regular part in sequencing many health

issues, so we‟re saying there‟s a lot of exiting things to come, and we 20

look forward to seeing science of kina being put in our schools

actually. There‟s so much that can happen in that 24 hours that they can

see it, developing the kids, so it‟s really good.

Also around Hoods Bay, Ngamahau, sorry we call that Hoods Bay, it‟s 25

named after Captain Hood. The paper nautilus might have been

mentioned earlier and this settles here, we‟ve seen it, we‟ve dived it

and there‟s really only a few places that that comes from in the

Marlborough area, and it settles in the channel, and it comes from the

Pacific, and the Ngati Whatua have a bit of legend with nautilus, as it 30

lands onto the beach – part of their visions from one of their prophecies

was that the powers unseen will come ashore, and a few generations

later that was the Treaty, that was the start of the Treaty that came to

their place first in the far north, and then from there it moved on down.

And effectively that‟s what happens here, the nautilus comes down to 35

here, and we‟re one of those Treaty places.

The nautilus paper shell come into the Sound in early Spring and these

are mainly found from Deep Bay to the entrance, I‟ve said that and

they‟re usually found outside the shallow kelp lines. Sometimes they 40

come ashore in the southerlies. While not rare in the far north, they‟re

peculiar to our area, and like I said, we found that not everyone gets

them. They are to us a rare species worth looking after.

I‟m going to move into the aquaculture now, and I‟m saying this from a 45

marae perspective really. It mixes up really because I did 17 years

Blenheim 03.10.12

work with Te Atiawa as a chairman of the company called Taranui, and

it had a good set of trustees, and we drove a lot of the aquaculture, and

we‟ve become significant holders in that aquaculture. It‟s ironic, I find

myself talking against this, but I feel quite comfortable because there‟s

so much - what I‟ve mentioned about that kina is so important to our 5

people we need to get it through.

Now we prefer to work with the Regional Coastal Plan, and in our view

it is a process that works to date. Alan has alluded to it with Counsellor

Briggs, he was one of the ones that played a big part in the plans for it, 10

I understand, and it really worked for us.

In the 1990s we participated in the Marlborough District Council

Coastal Planning process and submitted our views, and many of our

views were integrated into the plan. For example we, we felt that the 15

demarcation line for aquaculture to Urikapara to Motukina Point was a

good idea and I‟ve explained it now with regard to the health of our

ecosystem. It is the channels that brought life into the Sound. It‟s the

foundation of the work chain.

20

[11.50 am]

That as Tory Channel also is currently the gateway it provided an

opportunity to view the channel for people departing in its minimal or

entering minimal undisturbed state. So as soon as that came in they 25

could see part of nature. So we thought it would be a good idea to have

an area devoid of commercial service farming, so we supported that.

Now with the areas approved in the regional or coastal plan, whatever

it was, we then applied for and were granted water space as an iwi. At 30

last we had farm space in our own rohe and I remember one of those

hearings and Counsellor Briggs played a big part in that in

acknowledging our whakapapa and the work that we did in that and

that was in Oyster Bay. Oyster Bay is one of our last places that we

have registered kaitiaki. Arthur Hebly (ph 1.36) was the last kaitiaki 35

there and it‟s to do with the Oyster Act.

While the channel was not recognised as a commercially viable mussel

production area because mussels were the thing in the day and like

anyone else we wanted to be in productive areas but at least we had 40

farms, unproductive maybe but we were of the view that in time as

aquaculture industry develops and the commercial viability of those

species increases that these farms will come into their own. There were

about 10 farms in that zone and iwi owned about 40 per cent of them

including whānau. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

We see the term or the reference for these applications of national

significance. It‟s a bit of a stretch of the imagination. When with a bit

of time and planning those same objectives that the applicants are after

would probably well have been reached with good consultation, good

planning processes. So allocating this precious resource without prior 5

cultural or public impact study is only creating grievances, we believe.

It‟s not working off an improved plan, approved by iwi, approved by

the community, and its other user groups. It‟s ticking boxes. It is

preferencing commercial aquaculture in its roughest form, roughest, is

a rough form of setting iwi commercial without taking account of iwi‟s 10

own commercial views.

When it comes to allocating these waters spaces, we are aware that

Tory Channel is a prime water space, prime quality, it‟s got everything,

everything that anyone can dream of. One of the things we see is when 15

it comes to allocating water space I think the Act says we‟ve got to find

some water space for iwi and you can move it around and be in another

area or whatever, but what we are saying is we want the same. We

want exactly the same quality real estate as the applicant and if we

can‟t get the same quality real estate I don‟t think we want money 20

either because it‟s got to be – we‟re after sustainability. We believe

that we need title, not just a cheque, not just to be fobbed off because

like Paia said earlier this could be forever. Once the applicants are in

they‟re there and the applicants at some stage will probably become our

primary objectors when we start developing. 25

[11.55 am]

We see it as an opportunity that we just didn‟t – haven‟t had a chance

to work with developing the coastal plan yet unless – we would have 30

anticipated that EPA process would be a process that we would use

when all other avenues had been exhausted. We‟ve relied on you to

provide that pathway when setting iwi aqua-allocation along with the

rest of aqua industry. We believe cultural views are of national

importance and as such ranks higher than those of national 35

significance.

We also look to see consistency in rulings. Prior to the last moratorium

iwi had lodged several marine farm applications and Totaranui is one

of them. We lodged the biggest application, the only application to be 40

done ever by iwi totally, no one else, just us and then we brought the

experts in later when we needed them. These were turned down on

navigation, yachting and tourism and recreational use and the same

issues that these ones are probably going to be coming up with. But

possibly even a bird might have popped up there, a shag or something. 45

79

Blenheim 03.10.12

In our views these issues are miniscule in comparison to the current

applications in our rohe. So if any of these farms were to be approved

what does that mean with regard to previous applications and their

rulings? And I know we could cite this – I understand we can cite this

national significance but it‟s taken us a long time as iwi to get 5

somewhere and we‟re not even there yet. We are capable of ruling –

lodging our own applications but that is not the way we should be

doing it. It is a system that forces us to desecrate our own ethos. It‟s

just not ticker. It is forcing us to enter a race for water space in order to

protect our values, our customary areas, just getting them turned down 10

provides a respite for a few year. So if we are going to apply for water

space there‟s a good chance it will get turned down. At least it stops us

people farming there. So what we‟re saying is we don‟t think this is

good process. That‟s why we went to the Tribunal in the end and

we‟ve come full circle again. Here we are, back again, first past the 15

post.

We are aware that iwi aquaculture is still an on-going consultative

process, part of which is how to integrate iwi into aqua in a meaningful

manner. In addition this can be done by regional agreements. Those 20

same agreements must also take account of iwi values so I guess what

I‟m saying here is we as iwi need to make sure that we‟re zoning areas

that are suitable too.

I was looking at some papers yesterday on compensation for 25

commercial, last year it was commercial fishing, and it was interesting

to see that everyone is talking about compensation and water space

which is essentially both groups are racing for water space. I didn‟t see

any that talked about the spawning area and the impact to the spawning

areas. So if we look at Port Gore again and Pig Bay, those may well be 30

spawning areas that hold spawn to a certain stage, either on the surface

or sub-surface. We don‟t know. That‟s why we‟re saying it would be

good to have tests, science, before we put marine farms in and plan it

through a planning process.

35

We believe Marlborough is a special case where first past the post

system may not be the best option. It differs from Tasman and Golden

Bay and other regions like Thames or Coromandel. Generally these

other regions have their space allocated offshore, effectively

minimising user conflicts. 40

We understand the Minister of Conservation is able to approve and use

alternative tools. The purpose for some of the changes is to make it

easier for Councils to apply other allocation methods and that the

Minister is able to amend aquaculture provisions in regional coastal 45

plans by regulation.

Blenheim 03.10.12

[12.00 pm]

Marlborough is already an area that has a huge amount of aquaculture,

it verges on everywhere. And I think, you know, while we have said 5

that the Council has taken a long time to – it has been slow in its

process, by jeez they have done a big job really. They have got

thousands of hectares that have got through over the years and I don‟t

think there is any other Council in the country that had to deal with that

issue of balancing. 10

So for iwi it is our culture, every bay and every river and every creek,

different parts of the moana has a story that is tied to our whakapapa,

every part of the bay, everything, everywhere you look. We believe

again, as I said earlier, we are national importance our views. We see 15

that a plan process is really the only way to go. Something that takes

into account our planning reviews. There are so many parts of

aquaculture farming that hasn‟t been accounted for yet, like intertidal

and subtidal, mid water and different methods that go with these

systems. They haven‟t been lodged yet and they are going to be equally 20

as big in volume too. So hence, again, what we are saying is we need a

plan that involves integrated kai culture, complementary feeding

groups, complementary with all user groups.

Currently, this process is an unnecessary cost in time and energy to iwi. 25

In a way it is diminishing the value of iwi‟s aqua settlement because

now they have got to stand up and go to these Courts to fight them.

Some of that putea is going to come from their own settlement. We

believe the government agents have a responsibility in re-pooling their

assets and their knowledge and working with the community and 30

getting a plan, eh. Kia ora.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, kia ora, Mr Bunt. Now, I understand Tina Looms

wishes to make a presentation on her own behalf.

35

Yes, Ms Looms.

MS LOOMS: Kia ora koutou. I have been asked to present this report because

I am one of a few that have lived here all my life. No reira kia ora.

[Māori content 4.52] My whānau has lived continuously in Waikawa 40

and the Sounds for eight generations.

I am a descendent of Rihari Tahuaroa.

[12.05 pm] 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

For seven years as children we lived in two worlds, dividing our school

days between Waikawa Pa and Wekenui, the bay that Alan and

Anthony have just talked about, while our father worked at the whaling

station. During this time we had annual picnics at local bays in Tory

Channel where we would learn the history from our elders. 5

This was a happy childhood, that is why my sisters, Rima Riwaka and

Marama Burgess and I are so passionate about the Sounds and strongly

object to King Salmon‟s proposal. A highlight of our trip to the

whaling station for my sister, Rima, and me was who would be the first 10

to spot a seal, they were very rare in the mid-50s. Today you will find

them sunny themselves on boats in our local marina, just down the road

here. I believe the introduction of salmon farms is responsible for this

increase.

15

The change of the Trust stance from objecting to now supporting New

Zealand King Salmon has created the need for this additional

presentation. This presentation is provided in direct negation to that

presented to the EPA by Te Atiawa Trust Board. It is presented as such

to ensure that you, the EPA Board, hear the voice of many Te Atiawa 20

who have been ignored and misrepresented in this New Zealand King

Salmon Hearing by the Te Atiawa Trust Board.

What is our particular relationship with Kurateau that we seek to

protect and retain. Kurateau substantiates our cultural heritage, the 25

very Kurateau refers to the blood flowing from Kupe‟s deed to slash

out the eyes of Te Wheke-o-Muturangi. Kurateau validates our iwi

history within korero about such feats as our whaka migration into

these waters. Kurateau portrays our ancestral seafaring prowess, as

illustrated through our involvement in industries such as whaling and 30

trading. Kurateau verifies that intergenerational association as part of

our tribal pipiha.

Kurateau affirms our spiritual association as evidenced by our many

urupa within its bays. Kurateau is our food basket and the 35

personification of our hospitality, as verified by the richness of kina,

paua and other kaimoana that our iwi is renowned for across the motu.

Kurateau stands as a source of iwi identity, mana and pride. It is a

significant taonga, one with which we seek to have an undisturbed

relationship with for as long as we wish to. 40

Why would iwi in their right mind want to impinge such imposing

structures as the proposed number of fish farms upon the beautiful

pristine waters and lifeline that is Kurateau? Why would we want to

farm salmon, a foreign fish species in concentrations with unknown 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

effects upon the food sources that are the very substance and

sustenance of us as an iwi?

We don‟t deny that the creation of financial wealth has its place in

society, but in this frenzied rush to create commercial capital, we reel 5

in despair at the cost to us as Te Atiawa in terms of the impacts that this

has upon our waters and upon us. In our eyes your very title of EPA,

Environmental Protection Authority, sees you charged with a critical

role of ensuring that the environment is protected.

10

As previously outlined, for us this environment is much more than a

tangible element of sea space. It is the relationships we foster, and the

interdependence that we share with this domain. It is the expression of

our mana whenua and mana moana and it is an inherent right that we

hereby call upon you to protect. 15

At the recent consultation hui with the Te Atiawa Board and iwi a

motion was placed that the Trust Board rescind its support and return it

to its initial objection. This motion was passed by the majority,

however, this decision was ignored. 20

What is it that we seek from you, the EPA Board who are hearing this

New Zealand King Salmon application? That you do not negate our

voice that you consider it as equal alongside that of Te Atiawa Trust

Board, that you ensure the misrepresentation above is not the reason we 25

are removed from the relationship that we want to have with Kurateau.

A relationship guaranteed under the Treaty of Waitangi and reinforce

within presentations such as this and other objections made before you.


30

The tides of Kurateau flow on.

[12.10 pm]

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora. We have one further speaker. Sorry, your name? 35

MR RIWAKA: Buna Riwaka.

JUDGE WHITING: Buna Riwaka.

40

MR RIWAKA: Thank you for the opportunity – our last minute decision.


Piripiri is the mountain, Waitohe is the stream, river, Waikawa is the

marae, Te Atiawa is the iwi, Rihare Tahuaroa is my ancestor. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

And that is he above the doorway there. Kia ora.

I would like to begin by acknowledging my great great grandfather

Rihare Tahuaroa, who has a Te Atiawa chief he not only helped

conquer but took possession and occupied the land. This occurred in 5

about 1826/1827. Ngati Tama, Ngati Mutunga(ph) of North Taranaki,

the kawhia iwi of Ngati Toa, Ngati Rarua Koata jointly formed the

heke [Māori content] which was led by Ngati Toa chief Te Rauparaha.

The land that I live on today, my whānau, is part of that conquest and 10

has been owned and occupied by our whānau since then. It fronts the

beautiful waters of Totaranui kurateau which is, and has been, the

kaimoana kete to te tau ihu. We as iwi and whānau have always eaten

and gathered kaimoana.

15

I don‟t believe that King Salmon can guarantee that their present fish

farms together with any they are currently applying for will not cause

contamination and depletion of the kaimoana. I can only assume they

are compliant with the laws and consents which allow them to operate

their fish farms on site. I have doubts about their ability to manage and 20

contain their waste, their pollutants, fish waste, paints, antifoulings,

chemicals, toxins which individually cause problems, but put together

are disastrous. As a customary kaitiaki my responsibilities and

obligations not only allows for controlled gathering of kai, but to also

ensure kaimoana is available for generations to come. 25

Also by way of protection from potential threat and I view this as a

threat by King Salmon, we have an obligation not only to our tipuna

but more importantly to our tamariki and our mokopuna for generations

to come. In my view King Salmon don‟t care about the kaimoana we 30

as Māori treasure and respect as part of who we are when they are

applying for more water space over our traditional kaimoana beds of

kina, paua, koura, pipi, kutai, tuna, ika, scallops, oysters, seaweed. All

within 20 minutes of each other. And that is a fact.

35

[12.15 pm]

My tipuna would not expect anything other than to make a stand for

what is guaranteed to us under Article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi. The

protection of our fisheries which was signed by Te Atiawa paramount 40

chief Te Manu Tahuaroa, uncle of Rihari Tahuaroa.

In finishing so my plea to those that make the decisions concerning

traditional Māori fishing areas, you are bound by the Treaty of

Waitangi. Kia ora. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, kia ora Mr Riwaka.

MR RIWAKA: If I may, sir. There is a lady who would like to give her

evidence and would like to be able to speak to it today if that‟s okay.

5

JUDGE WHITING: You can speak to it, yes.

MR RIWAKA: Thank you.

My name is Sharon Baker Love. I was born in Picton and lived in 10

Waikawa Bay all my life. I am totally opposed to aquaculture or fish

farming of any sort in the Marlborough Sounds. I currently work for a

boatyard based in Waikawa Bay. Our activities are closely monitored

and our consents are very clear as to what is a legal activity and what is

not. My job to ensure the foreshore of the yard is absolutely spotlessly 15

clean and no contaminants of any sort are allowed to flow into the

water, into the bay.

The prospect of additional salmon farms in Marlborough Sounds is a

major concern to me. The current farms that are being run by King 20

Salmon concern me for the very reasons I work so hard in the boatyard,

to keep our waters clean and pure for the natural environment. They

are not obeying or respecting the consents they have been granted and

their pollution levels are constantly hard-core, at the limit.

25

At the boatyard all our waste is taken off the property to relevant waste

stations. Not so in King Salmon‟s case. They use underwater water

blasters and all their waste and contaminants simply float away with

the current and settle elsewhere down the Sounds.

30

The sewerage created by the salmon in the nets builds up on the seabed

and because they need deep fast flowing water it gets spread for

hundreds of meters around the farm.

Lately King Salmon have been experimenting in other areas to compare 35

water quality from their consented areas to fresh where they haven‟t

been farming. Could this be a case of their self-polluted areas punish

them for their greed and I can‟t imagine who would have given them

their permission to tow their farms around Queen Charlotte Sounds

spreading yet more contaminants further and wider as they go? The 40

nature of their fish food to predators such as seals and sharks is another

major concern of mine.

Other Government Departments are working to preserve fish stocks in

the Sounds but the predators the salmon farms are attracting are not 45

obeying those fishing laws. So our blue cod stocks will be suffering

Blenheim 03.10.12

large losses. These predators are also creating major problems in the

way of safety issues for boat and property owner that are located in

areas close to or reasonably close to the farms.

This fish food is attracting thousands of birds to the farm areas too. 5

People that have properties in bays such as Ngamahau where a new

farm has been proposed would simply not be able to use their property

as before because of the mess birds will make to their buildings and

boats and equipment in general. It is a known fact in my place of work

the beach frontages of these properties will look at existing farm areas 10

becoming littered with debris, flotsam and all kinds of waste.

[12.20 pm]

Should I consider human waste in this thought too or I should I just 15

spare that thought? Do King Salmon have proper sewage facilities for

humans working on the farms or do they pump their toilets straight into

the sea?

Property owners in the likes of Ngamahau Bay have been there for a 20

couple of generations. They work out of the property and enjoy family

time on the beach when time allows. They and others will also suffer

financially because King Salmon will really moor their ugly noisy

salmon farm within 100 metres of the beachfront blocking their views

and encroaching on their privacy. I have to mention what a way to live. 25

King Salmon and their foreign partners say they don‟t need the

additional sites for financial survival and, when one considers they are

turning over $150 million per annum as they operate now, one would

hope not. 30

They do say that the Sounds are a convenient place for them to set up

shop because they are close to a productive township and they are

reasonably close to their farms by boat for their daily commute.

35

They say more jobs will be on offer but how many locals are they are

employing or would employ anyway? They say they will bring more

work into Picton for local businesses but I haven‟t seen any

King Salmon boats coming up onto any slipways.

40

I believe they are kissing(ph) on the foresight of our forebears when

they set up Picton. I strongly believe more fish farms in the Sounds

will deter potential property owners from investing in and coming on

holidays.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

Marine orientated businesses will be affected as the Marlborough

Sounds loses its appeal as a boating mecca because they have become

full with aquaculture.

I believe if King Salmon is successful in their bid the doors will open 5

for anyone to set up as fish farms and the Sounds and its beautiful

attractions will be lost forever. Please do not grant King Salmon any

additional sites in our backyard. Kia ora.

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora. 10

WAIATA

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, now Ms Paine, I think you are presenting the

submission on behalf of the Trustees of Te Atiawa. 15

MS ERTEL: Thank you, sir, my name is Kathy Ertel and I am the solicitor

representing the Trust.

[12.25 pm] 20

JUDGE WHITING: Ms Ertel, yes, sorry.

MS ERTEL: We have filed a submission. I just plan to take you briefly

through it and talk to it, rather than read it out to you. 25

JUDGE WHITING: Thank you.

MS ERTEL: The Trust has a current membership of over 3,000 people, and

that has been mentioned by other witnesses. Te Atiawa Trust initially 30

opposed this application, however following consultation between Te

Atiawa and New Zealand King Salmon, a proposal that satisfied the

issues raised by the Te Atiawa Trust was developed. This proposal, to

the extent that it was not commercially sensitive, was the subject of

consultation by the Trust, for the beneficiaries of that Trust. 35

In paragraph 3 I note for you the meetings and the methods used to

undertake that consultation, and there were – I think it‟s particularly

important that there were – that the Board note that there were many

meetings actually held at the marae and locally, so that the views of the 40

members of Te Atiawa were heard.

It is also acknowledged that there was a meeting on the 22nd of

September, which was an information sharing hui, and at that time

approximately 50 people were present and a significant number, or a 45

number of them were not members of the Te Atiawa Trust, however

Blenheim 03.10.12

there was a resolution past that the Trust rescind its support and go

back to opposing New Zealand King Salmon, 33 voted for that, 16

against.

The trustees took into account and considered carefully that motion, 5

and rejected that proposal. Te Atiawa Trust is very aware that there is

opposition from members of the iwi and it supports the Board – that

this Board‟s process affords the opportunity for those voices to be

heard. Clearly there are differences between the opposition from those

iwi members and the support of the Trust. 10

As the Board will note from the number and frequency of meetings to

discuss the application, much effort has been made by the Trust to

explain the rationale that the Trust adopted following its discussions

with New Zealand King Salmon over actions and policies that provided 15

the required mitigation of the effects raised by the Trust.

The evidence this morning we‟ve heard about the fisheries. The effect

of the New Zealand King Salmon proposal on the traditional fisheries

practice of Te Atiawa is considered by the Trust to be minimal. There 20

are other major activities that have, and continue to, diminish the

ability of Te Atiawa to enjoy its traditional fishing practices, that

included as has been raised earlier. The fast ferry damage which was

unspeakable, commercial fish catching within the Sounds which still

continues, past pollution and development which has destroyed the 25

kaimoana beds, for example, at Waikawa Bay from the building of a

mariner.

One of the earlier witnesses mentioned Shakespeare Bay and how it‟s

been effected by a deep water port. Prior to that port there was a 30

freezing works and they used to discharge the waste from that directly

into Shakespeare Bay, so it‟s been really decimated.

So it‟s not to say that Te Atiawa Trust is not concerned to ensure that

the fisheries are maintained and improved, but they‟re saying, put in a 35

context of other things that are happening and have happened, they

consider that the effect of the farms will be minimal.

If the identity of who the tangata whenua and the kaitiaki of the Queen

Charlotte Sounds becomes an issue for the Board, then I would ask that 40

you rely on the preliminary report of the Waitangi Tribunal, which was

a report given by the Tribunal addressing exactly who had customary

and traditional rights and where those rights are.

[12.30 pm] 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

The Trust encouraged and supported the withdrawal of the Armstrong

Report. It, I think, is important that the Tribunal‟s Report is the go to

reference guide on these issues, and the reasons for this is that the

Tribunal‟s an expert body, it‟s membership for this region included a

Māori Land Court Judge, now the Chief Judge of that jurisdiction, and 5

kaumatua of very high standing, such as the late John Tahuparae,

Professor Roger Maka, and John Clark.

Further, the enquiry process undertaken by the Tribunal allowed each

of the eight iwi of Tetoehu [Māori content 0.55] to participate on an 10

equal footing, having had the benefit of professional historical reports

funded by the Crown Forestry Rental Trust, and also experienced legal

Counsel representing them.

This enabled the robust testing by all affected parties where disputes or 15

overlaps occurred. So the Tribunal‟s preliminary report traverses in

detail all of the arguments put forward, and reaches conclusions that

inform the parties of their core area of influences as at 1840.

In summary, the Tribunal found that rangitane communities existed in 20

Wairou, Kaitana and Pelorus Sounds, Ngati Koata were at the Crossels

(ph 3.38) Harbour and French Pass, and reached as far as Pelorus

Sounds, and Ngati Kuia were also in this area. An Ngati Apa

community existed at Port Gore.

25

Importantly, for this Board, the Tribunal agreed that Te Atiawa were at

Arapawa and Queen Charlotte Sound, and Tory Channel, and that it

had obtained those as spoils of their conquests in the 1830s. These

areas were first shared with Ngati Toa, however the Tribunal found that

by 1840 Ngati Toa had essentially gone from this area. 30

I‟ve given the Registrar a full copy of the Waitangi Tribunal‟s Report

on this matter in CD rom form. From memory the report is probably

about 200 pages long. It is one of three reports, that preliminary report

on the customary interests in Te Tau Ihu of the eight iwi. There was a 35

second report which was what interests, if any, were held within the

Ngai Tahu takiwa, and then the third report was on the substantive

claims that were made, all of which were upheld.

The, unless I can help you further, the Chair of the Trust, Glenice 40

Paine, and kaumatua Neville Watson will present evidence for the

Trust, and they‟re also available for questions. Mrs Gemmell, the

Trust‟s historian is not able to be present here at the moment but is able

to answer any questions at a later date viva voce, or in writing if those

questions are to be put in writing. I‟m your hands on that matter. Thank 45

you.

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, thank you, Ms Ertel. There‟s been no – we‟ve read

of course the evidence that‟s been presented by the Trust and there‟s

been no notice of any intent to cross-examine, except from Mr

Browning. 5

MS PAINE: If you would, sir, Mr Browning advised me last night that he‟s

unable to come and apologises both to myself and to the Board.

JUDGE WHITING: So no one wishes to cross-examine you. 10

MS PAINE: I‟m devastated. Even though that may be the case, sir, I would

like to make a few comments.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, do you wish to do that in evidence or as a 15

submission?

MS PAINE: Yes, in evidence.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, certainly. 20

<GLENICE PAINE, sworn [12.34 pm]

MS PAINE: Thank you, sir, I‟d like to introduce myself for those that don‟t

know me. [Māori content 4.48]. Tena kotou katoa, tena kotou te 25

whānau. For those of you who don‟t me I am Glenice Paine, I am the

Chairperson of the Te Atiawa Trust. Sir, I understand the Board has

read my evidence.

Piripiri is the mountain, Waitohe is the stream, Waikawa is the marae, 30

Te Atiawa is my people, my name is Glenice Paine. Greetings.

[12.35 pm]

JUDGE WHITING: Yes. 35

MS PAINE: So I wasn‟t going to touch on that, I was just going to make a few

comments on some of the things that were said this morning but other

witnesses.

40

JUDGE WHITING: Yes.

MS PAINE: Right. I think we‟ve had a lot of comment this morning about

how passionate our people feel about Totaranui and Kurateau but one

thing that hasn‟t been said, and is – my evidence is remiss in this, is 45

that there are 10 trustees on Te Atiawa Trust. Five of those trustees

Blenheim 03.10.12

were born and bred in Picton, in Waikawa. One of those trustees, our

kaumatua, Neville Watson, is – or Neville will speak for himself later

on after me.

That is not to say that we also hold ahika. We also know our customary 5

areas. We also participate in our customary practices. So when one of

us, as Antony my whānaunga said this morning, my family did this, my

family does that, more often than not that means us all, not just one.

We all, in this room, have shared whakapapa.

10

So I just wanted to make that point, sir, that our trustees do whakapapa

to this land, do have passion and do have commitment. Our trustees too

have a different role to just our beneficiaries. It is our job to provide for

the future of our people, not only in a cultural sense, but in an

economic and social sense. 15

One of the things, I suppose now would be a good time to say, well

why does Te Atiawa Trust think this application and these conditions

are culturally acceptable to Te Atiawa. And for me, that would be best

explained with an example, and I thank my other [Māori content 2.25] 20

Alan Riwaka for bringing up the fast ferry report and giving you a

background on the ferry wash, and how that affected Te Atiawa.

So the effects of that altered our cultural behaviour as Te Atiawa. There

were places we couldn‟t go, there were things we couldn‟t do, there 25

were kaimoana that we couldn‟t take because it was no longer there. So

yes, it did culturally alter our behaviour, and that was unacceptable.

However the effects of this New Zealand King Salmon application,

we‟re talking five specific places. Fundamentally speaking this is not

going to alter Te Atiawa‟s cultural behaviour. We are still going to be 30

able to pass on our information to our mokos, that inter-generational

passing on of information. There are still places that we can customary

gather, so fundamentally this application doesn‟t alter that. And

underpinning that is those conditions that were proposed by King

Salmon, and fought long and hard for by your Trust Board, that would 35

actually go towards making sure that we practice being kaitiaki. We are

there in our backyard making sure that things, if they were to go right,

we are there positioned to actually have that early warning signal, and

isn‟t that what kaitiaki tanga is all about.

40

We‟ve heard about how we all whakapapa to the land and how we feel

about the moana. Well I too, along with our trustees own land in the

Sounds. My first cousin, Laura Bowdler, she and myself and my

siblings, we own, in our own right, tracks of land in Arapawa. So this is

our backyard, this is something spiritual to us as well, and knowing my 45

trustees I know they feel the same way.

Blenheim 03.10.12

[12.40 pm]

I think previously, sir, I‟ve heard mention of the Marlborough RPS,

Regional Policy Statement, and I thought I heard someone say it was 5

ready to be notified but we, as Te Atiawa Trust are representing our

Te Atiawa people on that forum and it is our understanding that we

haven‟t finished the iwi chapters of the Marlborough RPS. So I find

that quite bewildering, so I just would like to make that comment.

10

The other thing I would just like to pick up was Antony Bunt was

talking about our iwi commercial view. And we, as a Trust Board,

agree with Antony when he said, “Well, we are looking to

sustainability”, and that is what we are doing.

15

But I suppose to finish, sir, for us it is about being kaitiaki, this is our

backyard. If there is going to be development in our backyard then we

should be part of that development. We should have some hand in

managing that development and pointing it in whatever direction.

20

The Trust Board when it put together its cultural impact assessment,

which you have seen, the things contained in the assessment were those

concerns that were given to the Trust Board at the various hui by iwi

members. So these weren‟t a list of things the board sat down and said,

you know, these are of concern. This is a list of things that we obtained 25

from our iwi members on our rounds of consultation. And that is about

me, sir.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, kia ora, Mrs Paine.

30

MS PAINE: Thank you.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [12.43 pm]

WAIATA 35

JUDGE WHITING: Now, is there any other of the witnesses who have filed

evidence who wish to come forward to speak? Mr Neville Watson. Do

you wish to come forward, Mr Watson? Kia ora.

40

MR WATSON: [Māori content 3.13].

Introductory chant by the speaker. Tis daylight, tis dawn. To the

Chiefs, to the august people of all waka, from the North Island, the

South Island to the Chatham Islands, I greet you all. To the people 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

who passed on from each marae, and this marae, I acknowledge you

and, to the living, greetings, of each marae – greetings.

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora.

5

MR WATSON: [Māori content 4.15].

To the members of the Board, greetings, welcome, welcome. To you,

Edward, Mr Ellison, greetings to your family, your hapu and to your

people. To everyone here present, greetings. 10

JUDGE WHITING: Do you wish to be sworn in, Mr Watson?

MR WATSON: Oh, I don‟t know whether I need to really. What I am saying

is what I feel. 15

JUDGE WHITING: So it is more of submission than evidence.

MR WATSON: Ae, ae it is. In my opinion the pathway forward to economic

and social development for our people has, for far too long, been 20

stymied by the many policies and implementations of such by various

government and non-government entities. Our way forward to

attaining economic and social welfare and improved status evolves

around our participation and investment within a range of progressive

commercial activities. 25

[12.45 pm]

Whilst there exist commercial activities within the region in the realms

of wine, forestry, commercial fishing, tourism and other things we are 30

only but small players within these areas. And whilst the commercial

fish resources remain an important Crown settlement issue for iwi it is

readily recognised that not only nationally, but internationally there

exists an ever decreasing stock resource and profitability attainments

brought about by many issues affecting such within the wild stock 35

industry.

The alternative to this situation is to farm fish species in a monitored

and best practice manner in marine farms established for this purpose.

In association with those who have the experience and who have the 40

necessary infrastructures including the product marketing expertise

consolidated in place. The question no doubt will be asked, is the

economic and social welfare of our people of greater importance than

the environment and cultural aspects of pursuing such developments?

In my opinion all these issues have equal importance within the 45

decision-making process, but providing all the elements are equated in

Blenheim 03.10.12

a balanced form and in particular any environmental concerns there

exists no reason why there should not be participation within the fish

farming aquacultural industry.

It is claimed by some that the establishment of commercial activities 5

within the Sounds is and would be detrimental to the long-term

sustainability of the environmental levels in the region. I find that

perspective to be out of focus with what in fact is reality. To recognise

that we need to take a step back in time to the days within which our

forebears lived. They lived out their lives in Totaranui and give 10

consideration to the many commercial activities which our forebears

established. Activities which were vast and varied, initiated and

sustained commercial activities which produced, processed and traded

to and from many ports in Aotearoa and elsewhere. Obviously such

initiatives were established for the purposes of integration into 15

European economic society, but more importantly for the purpose of

support of the whānau responsibilities.

Let us also recall details of some of those commercial enterprises that

were initiated and implemented by our forebears. Those initiatives 20

were for the purpose of sustaining life and to support their existence

during that period of integration into the world of the pakeha

environment. Let us give further consideration to the challenges that

were issued by the government of the day to cut and clear large blocks

of rural land for conversion to agricultural production to assist with the 25

overall economic position of the country. During which time the

whānau and hapu could create the environment for sustaining their

needs and commitments. I ask the question: what would have been the

situation from the perspective of our forebears should such

environmental conditions and restraints as exist today been applied 30

back then?

[12.50 pm]

Do we believe if that had been the case would our tipuna have been 35

compelled to obliged such restraints as being of a priority nature to the

in-depth obligation of their concerns for the health, wealth of their

whānau, hapu and iwi? I do not think so. Many activities of a

commercial nature have been established within the region and should

be considered during this step back in time reconstruction with perhaps 40

what could have been considered the first commercial ship building and

maintenance slipway in New Zealand with Captain Cook‟s servicing of

his vessels at Ships Cove during his visits, during that 1770 period.

Research by others reveals the extent of the activities that evolved from 45

those events from trading of products to purchase transactions, to the

Blenheim 03.10.12

engagement of vessel crews, guides and other commercial initiatives.

These events introduced our Māori people to the processes and

strategies of trading activities with the European which eventually

paved the way to the realisation that led to the establishment and

involvement in many commercial activities by the Māori people. We 5

now have many commercial activities in the region from

accommodation, hotels, restaurants, other forms of tourism facilities,

supported by many other commercial operations. Launch companies,

travel operators, tour companies etcetera which in no small way

contribute to the commercialisation of the region. 10

Other commercial initiatives that were established such as the antimony

mining at Endeavour Inlet. The whaling industry already mentioned

established at Ships Cove. The logging out of native timbers and

transportations to ports afar by many whānau members residing within 15

the Sounds. These activities created employment and financial income

to enable the support of the whānau in the development of the

economic and social standards of our people. The input into the

economy of the region was considerable, in particular to the trading

sector of Picton. The sale and purchase transactions between our 20

parents and the provision suppliers and the accommodation of purchase

payments by the shopkeepers all contributed to the survival of our

families.

The benefits of these whānau hapu enterprises contributed to the entire 25

economic development of the region and those initiatives were as a

result of a forward-thinking people of those times. The kaupapa of our

forebears was based upon the importance of establishing an

environment that would ensure that the health and welfare of the

whānau was paramount in any decision-making process and/or 30

implementation. And that is precisely the same kaupapa that we as a

trust board have applied in arriving at our position relating to this plan

change application.

Some of the commercial activities referred to have been established by 35

companies owned by shareholders and whilst they created mahi and

employment in most instances on a seasonal basis our people provided

the labour content only and were not recipients of profits generated.

Our participation within the aquacultural industry will change that.

Our beneficiaries will not only have the opportunity of employment, 40

but will be able to share in the trading profits. Involvement within the

establishment of processing facilities and also be directly involved in

the on-going environmental management and monitoring systems of

the in situ development infrastructures.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

As a part of the aquacultural settlement process we along with others

are the recipients of water space. How should we effectively and

prudently manage and administer this if in fact we are unable to

develop such assets.

5

[12.55 pm]

It is necessary that we recognise that some of our settlements of Crown

resources emanate from Takutai Moana, and we need to be positioned

to allow us to expand economically with such resources. The economic 10

future and development of us as an iwi continues to be a challenge and

of the utmost importance to us, with an immediate need for us to

prepare ourselves for what, in my opinion, will be some of the roughest

economic waters that we will face in the not to distant future.

15

We need only to consider the economic position of so many countries

in the European continent, the current situation in Asia, particularly

China, and the immediate effect this downturn in economic factors has

affected us and the economies of both Australia and, indeed, ourselves

here in New Zealand. 20

These events will further jeopardise our ability to be able to provide

future employment for our people whom already are represented in

large numbers on the statistical records of unemployment along with

other aspects of socio welfare representation. 25

The alternative to employment obviously is unemployment and reliance

upon social welfare and, in many instances, upon food banks on a

weekly basis. And whom are those that require such assistance? To a

large degree they are our Māori people and families. Current statistics 30

indicate that one in five families here in New Zealand have children

who live below the poverty line with many children going to school

with inadequate breakfast and, indeed, no lunches to take to school.

How can we contribute to the rectification of this problem? We must,

in my opinion, implement policies that enable us to fully develop those 35

resources that form part of our putea kitea. (ph 2.47)

This achievement will be attained only if we are able to participate

within the investment of commercial activities such as aquaculture and,

in particular, in the commodity areas of consumables, example foods, 40

as opposed to manufactured production commodities. Food will

continue to remain to be the most important requirement for mankind

event through tough times of depressions. Our problem will be our

ability to pay for it. Hence the need for us to raise the level of our

economic status by participating within industries such as aquaculture. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

I again make reference to the establishment of commercial activities in

the region, particularly in the Sounds, with further reference to the

environmental aspects and subsequence of some of those previously

established activities, as has been mentioned, the Picton refrigerating

company freezing works established in the late 1800s. And I again ask 5

the question what would have been the situation then, had the same

regulatory requirements that now exist today if they had been in force

back then, specifically with regard to the discharge of processing

products into the waters of Shakespeare Bay, Kaipupu and the entrance

into Picton Harbour? 10

What about the existing sewerage discharge that even today, after 50 or

60 years, continues to enter Picton Harbour at Kaipupu Point servicing

the community of Picton? Where is the public concern pertaining to

the risk factors from the environmental point of view regard the many 15

transport and passenger service vessels that ply the waters of Totaranui

on a daily basis? Some of which are considered to be in the national

interest.

[1.00 pm] 20

And I accept that could well be so, but so is the health and welfare, and

economic wellbeing of our people of this country in the national

interest.

25

We are the beneficiaries of a massive amount of preparatory work, that

has contributed to the aquaculture industry by forward thinking people

within our iwi, whom recognised one of the pathways to enhancement

of our people‟s welfare, and I acknowledge the likes of Alan Riwaka,

Antony Bunt, our kaumatua Tom Norton, and indeed others, whom 30

also recognise that it would be only through our own efforts that we

will overcome the endowed burden of economic disparity that exists,

and by taking advantage of opportunities that may prevail.

I‟m of the understanding that there has been opposition to the plan 35

change application based on aesthetic considerations, relating to the

water surface located marine structures. In some instances these

structures, it is claimed, create an unappealing blemish upon the

environment. I respectfully suggest that the well-established forest

industry in the Sounds has a far greater detrimental devaluation of the 40

aesthetic aspects than marine farm structures. \

Plantations that are now well consolidated in large areas of the Sounds

are serviced by the bulldozing of access roads, creating distinct

scouring on the surface of the hills, which become discharge ways for 45

the conveyance of soils and such like during the course of moderate

Blenheim 03.10.12

and heavy downpour rainfalls. These run offs make immediate deposits

of soil and debris onto the beaches and into the marine ecosystems. I

am unaware of any surveillance or any intense monitoring systems that

are implemented to oversee such eventualities.

5

Consideration should also be given to the effects of the sea bottom

dredging of the seafloor, for sea foods such as scallops, by both the

commercial and the recreational industries. Major damage to the seabed

environment is created by this harvesting process, with marine life

being considerably affected. I again am unaware of any surveillance or 10

environmental monitoring systems that are established, let alone

implemented.

I‟m of the opinion that if this plan change application is rejected in its

totality, we would have lost an opportunity to participate with an 15

industry that will create major returns for our beneficiaries, that will

contribute to the raising of the levels of our economic, social and

spiritual development of so many people.

There is no need for me to seek support for the kaupapa that I present, 20

by way of public demonstration of any nature, either on land or sea, as

all the support that is required is contained within the contents of the

statistics, which indicate the true economic and social position of our

Māori people as being over represented in all the negative indicators

within recorded. 25

I am compelled, as a final comment, to make reference to the

achievement of some of the larger iwi organisations, such as

Tuwharetoa, Waitahu and Tainui who have successfully developed

their beneficiaries‟ assets to a level of economic acceptability, and that 30

has been achieved by the pursuing of and acceptance of the challenges

of participating within all viable opportunities that come across their

board tables.

[1.05 pm] 35

I think I can quite confidently make the statement, not one of these very

successful entities have within their development strategies a policy of

non-acceptance of any Crown settlement as a result of a satisfactory

negotiation. 40

My point being, like these iwi structures, we also need to accept the

challenges that confront us and the opportunities that arise. Challenge

those who may have the desire to inhibit us from attaining our

objectives, which is the establishment of an economic and social 45

environment of a nature that will benefit the beneficiaries of Te Atiawa.

Blenheim 03.10.12

In my position as an elected member of Te Atiawa Trust, whom have

established decision making parameters that bind us to acting in the

best interest of our beneficiaries, I am proud to say that is what has

been done and I am confident that over the span of time that will be 5

proven to be so.

[Māori content 1.15].

Through listening, you learn. Through learning comes enlightenment. 10

Through enlightenment comes education, and through education comes

wellbeing.

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora.

15

MR WATSON: Thank you, sir.

WAIATA

MR WATSON: [Māori content 2.36]. 20

May the Lord bless and protect us.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, kia ora, and thank you, Mr Watson. I think the

wharekai is calling us so we will adjourn for lunch. 25

ADJOURNED [1.08 pm]

RESUMED [2.05 pm]

30

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, good afternoon everybody, welcome back after

another lovely lunch. It is one of the good things about visiting marae

is the wonderful hospitality one gets and the beautiful food that gets

dished up and today was no exception. Now, have we got one more

speaker from the Trust? 35

MS ERTEL: Sir, that is completed, thank you.

JUDGE WHITING: That is completed, yes, thank you. Mr Bennion?

40

MR BENNION: Sir, Mr Harry Love would like to give a presentation first. I

don‟t think he is part of our presentation but I am not sure.

MR LOVE: I am an individual.

45

JUDGE WHITING: Sorry?

Blenheim 03.10.12

MR LOVE: I have got my own submission.

JUDGE WHITING: You are a submitter?

5

MR LOVE: Yes.

JUDGE WHITING: Oh, yes, very well. Yes, of course. You can go to the

table if you wish to make a submission or if you wish to give evidence

you come here. 10

MR LOVE: [Māori content 1.21].

<HARRY LOVE, sworn [2.07 pm]

15

MR LOVE: If I may ask the Board I plan to deviate slightly but on the same

track as my evidence, if I can just do little bit extras on it as I go

through it?

JUDGE WHITING: Yes. 20

MR LOVE: Thank you. Kia ora koutou. My name is Harry Love. I was born

at Aotea, Te Arawa Bay, East Bay, Arapawa Island. I am here to

present my case against the proposed extension to King Salmon‟s

application for additional fishing space in the Marlborough Sounds 25

contrary to the Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan.

My iwi are Te Atiawa from my father and Ngati Kauwhata from my

mother. I am the eldest son of Malcolm Love of East Bay. He was the

fourth child of Hakirau Love of East Bay. Hakirau was the youngest 30

child of Taniora Love of East Bay. Taniora Love was the fourth child

of Hone Tanerau Love of Te Awaiiti, Tory Channel.

Honetaria was the eldest child of John Agar Love, the whaler of Te

Awaiiti, Tory Channel. The Love whānau have 200 years of living and 35

fishing in the Marlborough Sounds, commercial, recreation and

customary.

My argument against this application is based on the customary history

that I will provide both in written and verbal forms. Te Atiawa has 40

long been recognised as the kaitiaki of Queen Charlotte Sound

including Tory Channel.

If I am allowed to deviate here, sir, when I was born at East Bay, we

left there when I was seven years old and we went up to the 45

North Island, and every year I would come back here for the school

Blenheim 03.10.12

holidays to Waikawa or Seddon to stay with my cousins. It was while I

was coming back on one of those trips I came back with my

Uncle Jack, that was my Dad‟s brother, Jack Love. He was in the

army. We came down on the Tamahine and I can remember his shiny

boots, he had shiny black boots Uncle Jack. And we went past the 5

whaling station at Te Awaiiti and he said, “Boy”, he said, “That‟s

where you‟re from, Te Awaiiti, that‟s where all the Loves are from

originally”.

And then we went past in the next bay and the next bay was 10

Ngamahau Bay, and he said, “That‟s where we get all our kai from”.

We lived there and went down got all our kai from. So that is just a

little bit of that.

My personal association with customary fishing dates back to 1978 15

when I was asked to dive for kina for my grandmother, Annie Love‟s

tangi at Picton.

[2.10 pm]

We dived at a place called Ngamahau Bay, Tory Channel. And the 20

boat I was on that day was with my uncle Kerry, Kerry Love, my father

Malcolm Love and our diver was John Hamie (ph 0.19) who was one

of the good divers around Marlborough at the time.

In 1984 we had to dive for my Uncle Kerry Love‟s tangi at Seddon. In 25

1994 we dived for my father Malcolm Love‟s tangi at Waikawa. In

1995 we dived for my father‟s unveiling at Waikawa. Over the years

I‟ve been on many trips to Tory Channel for customary. I‟ve

customary permits for some of these and can produce them if required.

I can go back to when I worked with my father to Ngamahau Bay. I 30

remember him saying to me – I said to him, Dad what‟s this place? He

said, this is where we get our kai from. And I said, oh yeah but there‟s

plenty of other places around the Sounds we get it. He said, well yes

there are, but this is where we come. I said, okay. And he said to me,

boy, he says, keep an eye on the place will you. Make sure it‟s okay. 35

Yep, okay.

And as I say over the years I‟ve been on many diving trips to Tory

Channel, customary. Many of these permits were dived at Ngamahau

because it continues to provide the iwi with kina. And as I say when I 40

say that three weeks ago we were there diving for kina at Ngamahau.

As recently as August 2011 we dived in Tory Channel for kina for the

tangi of Sir Paul Reeves in Auckland. And I have got an attached letter

here that if I could read before I carry on with this. I‟ll read it. This is

a letter to the Te Atiawa Trust. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

“Mr Chairman, sir. I wish to comment on the following. On August

11th 2011 I was asked by the deputy chairperson of Te Atiawa Trust,

Mr Ron Riwaka, if I would be able to use my boat to assist in diving

for kaimoana for the tangi of Sir Paul Reeves being held in Auckland

three days later. The following day three boats were available for the 5

diving. My boat the Wanderer, Ron Riwaka‟s boat and Mark

Barcello‟s (ph 2.29) boat. My boat and Mark‟s boat went to Tory

Channel for kina while Ron‟s boat went to Arapara, Cabbage (ph 2.37)

Beach for paua.

10

The divers on my boat were Isaac Love, Billy Reeves and Aaron

Harris. On Mark‟s boat Ana (ph 1.48) Riwaka and Chris were there to

assist. I‟m not sure how many were on Ron‟s boat but I know there

was Ron and Buna Riwaka and two or three others. Some six hours

later we returned to Waikawa marina with 48 sacks of kina. Ron and 15

his group returned the same time with their paua. All of the kaimoana

was then transported to Waikawa marae where a lot of the local iwi

came down to process it all. After several logistical problems the

kaimoana was then taken to Auckland for Sir Paul‟s tangi. This koha

was acknowledged as being from Te Atiawa and Waikawa marae. 20

Mr Chairman I wish to convey my thanks to the divers and all who

helped, but I would especially like to thank all the local iwi who came

to the marae to assist. To have my iwi and marae mentioned on the

national stage heartens me. I am proud to be Te Atiawa and I am 25

especially proud to be from Waikawa marae.”

That letter was dated on the 26th of February 2012. Sir, my example is

many of our iwi who have all by their whakapapa through the

generations participated in customary fishing for both tangihanga and 30

hui, both in Te Atiawa rohe and beyond. The majority of this activity

has taken place throughout Queen Charlotte Sounds and Tory Channel.

Te Atiawa regards it as a customary take of kaimoana as of importance

to the highest order. During most of the diving trips I‟ve been

accompanied by my cousin, Isaac Love, who has dived for 50 years in 35

the affected areas and continues to dive both commercially and

customary. Isaac did agree to speak before the panel of his experience

but he has since withdrawn. He‟s been too busy. The paua season has

just started so he‟s been busy out doing that.

40

We are not against salmon farming, but we are fearful of the floodgates

being opened if this application succeeds. We are fearful of our

traditional customary areas being further eroded. We as Te Atiawa

strongly believe that to lose what has been an important part of our

heritage for over 200 years will render our mana null and void. An iwi 45

without mana is no longer an iwi, but a ghost that no one will

Blenheim 03.10.12

remember. This is not the heritage I want to leave for our mokopuna.

We need to maintain the integrity and mana of tipuna and what they

left for us.

[2.15 pm] 5

Sir, when you make your decision on this application, you are able to

consider us Te Atiawa and our history and association with the area

concerned.

10

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, kia ora Mr Love.

MR LOVE: I‟ve just about finished, sir, and I‟d just like to finish with a short

closing submission I just wrote last week. So, I‟ve got to stand on this,

when I stand on this and – kia ora, I stand on this pai pai where my 15

tipuna stood, my voice is theirs and I am them, they are me.

In my closing address to the EPA, I refer my commitment to customary

fishing for my iwi in the Marlborough Sounds. My fear is that this may

be difficult to sustain due to the decision that this Court will bring 20

down. I fear that the floodgates will be open for everyone to come to

Tory Channel and the Marlborough Sounds for fish farming, further

eroding our catchment area for kaimoana.

I fear that my grandson Max, who stands here with me, will not be able 25

to dive for kaimoana as his grandfather has. He will not have the

pleasure and pride that I have in seeing in tangata whenua and

manuhiri, share the kaimoana that we our tipuna have shared for the

past 200 years.

30

I‟m extremely disappointed that the Te Atiawa Trust has chosen to

support King Salmon‟s application. The decision is theirs not mine, or

the majority of our iwi. I cannot understand their reasoning. If I may

quote, Justice Eddy Durie, who recently said, “I think it‟s a pity that

many of our people are getting too involved in that corporate world, 35

because it‟s corrupting our customary ethics. They look for the profit

but not that which would be most profitable for us in the long term.

These leaders tend to be things as commercially sensitive and not to be

just discussed with the people to whom they should be accountable.

The best test for a leader as Justice Durie is, how are the worst 40

members of tribe fairing?”

Sir, I will finish with my – I‟m proud of my heritage, I‟m Te Atiawa,

Awanui Te Rangi, we are from the heavens above, joined by the river

to the sky. I am from Waikawa Marae, I am Harry James Love. Kia 45

ora.

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, kia ora.

WAIATA

5

MR LOVE: [Māori content 4.16] tena kotou, tena kotou, tena kotou katoa.


JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora. Now are there any other submitters who have 10

made a – filed a submission who have given notice that they wish to be

heard? I think I‟ve covered everyone? So we move onto the next stage

of the proceedings and it‟s your opening Mr Bennion.

[2.20 pm] 15

MR BENNION: Tena kotou [Māori content 00.10], tena kotou katoa. [Māori

content 00.14].

Greetings to the Board, to everyone, to Te Atiawa, and other iwi. 20

Sir, you should have in front of you a submission, I think it runs to

about 15 pages. I will speak to that and we follow with some witnesses

which I‟ll briefly touch on. My hope is we‟d be through certainly by

the end of today, looking at timing. We‟ll see how we go. 25

Sir, the Tahuaroa-Watson whānau are a significant whānau of

longstanding in Te Atiawa. There are several 100 family members,

that‟s what I‟m advised. The whānau oppose all of the plan change and

the associated consents, however their strongest objections relate to the 30

Papatua, Kaitapeha, Ngamahau and Ruaomoko sites, and I should just

clarify there, sir, they oppose the plan change, and I guess by

implication that effects the consents as a whole, but in terms of the

consents, those four areas are the particular concern.

35

And I‟ve just thought, the front of my submission, just to briefly list

our witnesses who you‟ll be aware of. So that will be Trevor Watson,

Bosun Huntley, Johnnie Norton, Laura Bowdler who will, she tells me,

explain her connection with Glenice Paine, Arthur Huntley and we

have available Hilary and John Mitchell, from Mitchell Research. 40

I‟m also saying, sir, there are representations by Manu Paul and

Reynold Tirikatane, and I‟m going to talk with my friends from King

Salmon about that matter at afternoon tea. I understand they‟ve got

some questions about those representations and we‟ll see if we can get 45

back to you on that matter, after afternoon tea.

Blenheim 03.10.12


MR BENNION: So moving to 2.1. The whānau are tangata whenua in terms

of the Resource Management Act, that is in relation to these particular 5

areas, they are constituent part of the hapu that holds mana whenua

over the area.

If there is any doubt about the matter, the Marine and Coastal Area Act

2011 refers extensively to whānau as groups that may apply for and 10

hold customary rights in the coastal marine area. This is quite an

interesting matter in that legislation, so that the preamble refers to

whānau four times, and I‟ve laid those out in full. Sir, I don‟t intend to

read them all through but you can see that there‟s comment there under

sub-section 2 of the – or clause 2 of the preamble, there‟s criticism 15

about the discriminatory effect of the 2004 Act on whānau, hapu and

iwi.

The Ministerial Review Panel said that the 2004 Act had been severely

discriminatory against whānau, hapu and iwi and there needed to be 20

legislation that recognised and provide for the interest of whānau, hapu

and iwi in the foreshore and seabed, and so clause 4 of the preamble,

“This Act takes account of the intrinsic inherited rights of iwi, hapu and

whānau derived in accordance with tekanga and based on their

connection with the foreshore seabed and the principle of 25

manakiitanga”, and I was interested this morning to hear Bev Hart

actually express that, that manakiitanga for the Waikawa Marae was

central to their thinking about the coastal marine area. So she was –

certainly that‟s reflected in the legislation.

30

I think it‟s also important to note that the Act, and here I mean the

Marine and Coastal Area Act, also assumes that whānau exercise

kaitiaki tanga over coastal marine areas. And this is without reference –

without need to get a protected customary rights order or marine title.

There‟s an assumption that rights might be there already and that 35

there‟s a scheme, for example, for – I‟ll come to you later, for whānau

and others to be involved in as affected whānau, when the coastal

marine area is being dealt with by the Department of Conservation.

[2.25 pm] 40

There does not seem to be any dispute that the whānau that the whānau

are a significant whānau of Te Atiawa, it doesn‟t seem to be contested,

that they have a right to claim mana whenua over areas set out in their

evidence. They‟re not – I don‟t understand they‟re saying that‟s 45

exclusive, but they‟re saying they have mana whenua there.

Blenheim 03.10.12

Nor is there any dispute that they‟re entitled to assert these claims

despite the Te Atiawa Manuwhenua Ki Te Tau Ihu Charitable Trust

taking a different view of the plan change proposal and associated

applications for resource consent. Indeed, as I‟ll come to below, it 5

seems the Trust is actually supportive of whānau, specifically dealing

separately with their concerns, and I give an example of that.

So then turning to consultation and the New Zealand Coastal Policy

Statement, which is a particular issue that I wish to address in relation 10

to consultation. Now first it is accepted that in law, flawed consultation

with Māori at the initial stages of a proposal can, in the right

circumstances, be remedied by bringing issues to hearing with

appropriate evidence, and Counsel for New Zealand King Salmon has

pointed that out, and I don‟t – we don‟t have any problem with that. 15

But we do say that such comfort is not available in this case. We say

there has been very badly flawed initial consultation and it has not been

remedied, and instead we argue that the Board faces a muddle of

process and evidence requirements, which we submit are fatal to the 20

proposals.

In terms of consultation there are two different requirements.

Consultation over the plan change and consultation over the resource

consent applications. These are distinct requirements and ort not to be 25

confused.

Now the whānau endorses the submission of others and we understand,

including from New Zealand King Salmon, that the intent of the

legislation is to allow resource consent applications to be lodged at the 30

same time as a plan change, simply as a way to retain first place in the

cue to use the new space, that makes sense, but no more than that. It is,

for example, quite feasible a plan change might have provisions in

relation to consultation and the like.

35

We say the applicant has conflated and confused these requirements,

the differences between the plan change and the resource consent

aspect of their application. In relation to the plan change, private

request for plan change are provided for under Part 2, and I set out

there clause 23, which states, “If a local authority receives a request it 40

can require the person to provide further information necessary to

enable the local authority to better understand the nature of any

consultation undertaken or required to be undertaken, if such

information is appropriate to the scale and significance of the effects of

the proposal of the plan change”. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

What does “require to be undertaken” mean? I‟ve been unable to find

any particular case on this but it appears to mean that consultation may

be required where a proposal warrants it, if we just read that provision

on its face. Well that‟s - if that‟s the case that‟s obviously true of

consultation with Māori in this case, as NZKS readily accepts. They‟ve 5

readily accepted they needed to consult because of the significance of

the proposal, I don‟t think there‟s any question about that.

In addition, when considering a regional plan change the Board must

give effect – the Board must give effect to the New Zealand Coastal 10

Policy Statement, and I‟ve set out, sir, policy 2, because in our

submission that creates expectations about consultation for proposals

effecting the coastal marine area. Again, sir, I don‟t tend to read out the

whole of that policy, but to take you briefly to the parts I‟ve underlined.

15

So, it asks – the policy asks decision makers “to recognise that tangata

whenua have continuing cultural relationships, including with places

where they have lived and fished four generations”. It asks decision

makers, “to think about the involvement of iwi authorities or hapu on

behalf of tangata whenua in the preparation of plans, by undertaking 20

effective consultation, and that consultation is to be early, meaningful

and as far as practicable, in accordance – as far as practicable in

accordance with Tikanga Māori”.

[2.30 pm] 25

And then it says, “with the consent of tangata whenua”, which means,

obviously an engagement with tangata whenua, “and as far as

practicable in accordance with Tikanga Māori, to incorporate

Matauranga Māori in Regional Policy Statements” – and I‟ve got 30

underlining there, “and private plan changes”.

And then (d), “provide opportunities and appropriate circumstances for

Māori involvement in decision making, for example, when a consent

application is dealing with localities of cultural significance”. 35

And, sir, I won‟t read the rest, but turning the page then, if we come to

(g)(1) “in consultation and collaboration, recognise the importance of

Māori cultural and heritage values through such methods as historic

heritage, landscape and cultural impact assessments”. 40

Now it is our submission in relation to those requirements, and the Act,

it is hard to think of a worse process than the approach taken here. We

say that selecting sites on the basis of biological factors for optimum

salmon farming – that should be, before discovering if they are 45

important sites to iwi, was the first error.

Blenheim 03.10.12

Apparently it did not cross the mind of New Zealand King Salmon that

features of those sites attractive for salmon farming might have made

them attractive as customary use sites over many generations. Then,

treating customary users of those sites, over many generations, as 5

simply a potential commercial impediment to King Salmon‟s

commercial aspirations.

New Zealand King Salmon has been quite blunt about the very limited

initial information and discussions with iwi and the reasons for this, to 10

avoid losing commercial advantage. My clients say that borders on, if it

is not offensive, given 100s of years, or certainly in excess of 170-180

years of attachment with these places.

New Zealand King Salmon is quite entitled to reach its own 15

conclusions on the plan change that it might want to undertake, and

support them with appropriate evidence after consultation has taken

place. What the Coastal Policy Statement makes clear that it may not

call consultation a process where it has already determined where farms

will be placed. An applicant for a plan change who had made such a 20

predetermination has a mountain to climb, in terms of the evidence that

will be necessary to ensure decision makers that the Coastal Policy

Statement is going to be given effect to.

Did parliament intend that the requirements of the Coastal Policy 25

Statement should be waived in the case of the aquaculture amendments

and this process? Well there‟s no suggestion that‟s the case. If it had

been the intention that Māori have mana whenua over places where

they have lived and fished for generations could be ignored, if not

misled in the initial consultation, and I‟ll come back to that in the 30

second, and policy 2 rendered largely redundant because of commercial

imperatives, we would presumably have heard something about it in

parliament, or there would have been some provision about that in the

RMA.

35

Now I‟ve said, if not misled in initial consultation – I should perhaps,

perhaps it would be fairer, sir, to say, I think it‟s clear – we say from

the information that minimal information was provided and critical

information was missing. Is that misleading, perhaps we can go that far,

but certainly minimal information provided and critical information 40

was missing in that initial consultation.

Sir, and I just briefly there, I won‟t take you through it, but I invite you

to go back to the transcript where Mr Ironside on behalf asked

questions of Mr Gillard, and that‟s pages 822 and 823 of the transcript, 45

and he confirmed there that initial letters did not disclose where sites

Blenheim 03.10.12

were. Just said to people, look tell us if you‟ve got concerns about

broad areas, and then subsequently letters didn‟t – where the more

specific sites were talked about, don‟t appear to have alerted anybody

to the idea that the process would be going straight to a Board of

Inquiry. 5

[2.35 pm]

People might have really thought, “Well, we'll be going through the

procedures of the plan etcetera”, in the normal sense that signal doesn‟t 10

appear to have been given.

So at 3.12: Turning then to the evidence before the Board that can

satisfy it that the Coastal Policy Statement can be given effect to by this

proposal and that it meets the requirements of sustainable management 15

to 6E, 7A and 8 in particular in the RMA.

New Zealand King Salmon has produced as evidence and now

withdrawn, a limited survey of iwi interests in the Sounds which

locates the outlines of the rohe in which groups held and hold interests. 20

With that limited evidence removed, New Zealand King Salmon

evidence on these vital issues consists of comments by Mr Gillard and

Mr Cardwell about their poor initial consultation and subsequent

invitations to mana whenua groups to produce reports in response to its 25

detailed proposal.

I would suggest, sir, a rather extraordinary way of going about

preparing a plan change.

30

It is little surprise then that the planning from Ms Dawson does not

even mention section 6E, “a matter of national importance”. Her

discussion of section 8 consists of recording her understanding the

consultation with iwi has been open and informative, and she provides

no details. 35

An assertion that in terms of overall water space in the Sounds, a small

area only will be taken up – I‟m not sure what particular part of any

plan she might be thinking that being relevant to – and an assertion that

a possible follow-on benefit of the proposals will be the development 40

of commercial space, but of course that‟s not secured and I understand

from the opening comments by Mr Gillard “the best salmon farming

sites would have been essentially gone with this proposal even if iwi do

want to take up more commercial space”, so there‟s a bit of a double

edge sword there. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

Now while the protection of Māori values, places and cultural concerns

about coastal occupancy are mentioned that a dozen or more places in

the relevant plans and policy statements, and sir I want to amend this

statement to be fairer to Ms Dawson after wading through further

through the paper, Ms Dawson reflects “minimally” I should say, on 5

those, I‟ve said on “none”, it should be “minimally on those” and refers

to “no or minimal evidence in relation to them”, no or minimal

evidence in relation to them. And this is an extraordinary absence of

information for such a major proposal with such significant impacts on

cultural values. 10

And, sir, if I can just – again I – I just want to make a brief reference,

and I don‟t want – I don‟t think you need to go to the paper right now.

But just to note, for example, in appendix C to Ms Dawson's evidence

she has lists the policy for example the Marlborough Sounds Regional 15

Policy Statement and its comments about different values, Māori values

included, and then has comments in a table.

And for example, policy – on page 24, appendix C – policy 7.3.3

“cultural and heritage features”, the policy is “protect, identify 20

significant cultural and heritage features”. She says, “Details of any

specific significant iwi sites or values or specific locations used for

traditional customary fishing, gathering have not been provided. It is

not therefore been possible to examine the extent to which the proposal

will adversely affect any specific significant sites values or features.” 25

That is the sort of gap in the evidence which I‟m referring to, which I

submit is quite exceptional given the effects on iwi, Māori and whānau

and hapu of this proposal. Consequently we say, New Zealand King

Salmon has not even taken up, let alone discharged its evidential 30

burden.

It is also apparent from reading the opening submissions that New

Zealand King Salmon has simply ignored the many statutory and

planning indications and focused on issues of consultation, as they 35

might arise in relation to the applications for resource consent and not

the plan change. And even then, it relies on passive provisions which it

says “it is designed not to undermine, make worse, prevent continued

relationships with sites or the exercise of kaitiakitanga”.

40

The quite different considerations which relies in relation to the policy

statement and the plan change we say “have been overlooked”. Plan

change 24 itself, which creates a whole new zone in the CMA for

salmon farming makes no reference to Māori at all.

45

[2.40 pm]

Blenheim 03.10.12

And sir, just to add there, this I think is an important point, had the plan

change made even a single reference to Māori, which was something

that the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement anticipates in policy 2,

one can imagine the sort of extra effort and evidence that New Zealand 5

King Salmon would have had to “bring to you” to explain why that

reference was included. The fact is the plan change itself says nothing

on that score and then we simply move to the consents and responses to

particular issues that people have raised once the specific sites had been

identified. 10

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, that maybe so. But the plan itself has many

provisions that relate to Māori which would apply to this particular

zone.

15

MR BENNION: Yes, and - - -

JUDGE WHITING: And – in fact which this particular zone – in fact the plan

change has to be consistent with the many objectives and policies that

the plan provides - - - 20

MR BENNION: Yes.

JUDGE WHITING:- - - Māori. So whether it should “add yet another one” and

I don‟t know it could enhance what was already there because there are 25

quite strong provisions in both the Regional Policy Statement – well,

Coastal Policy Statement and the Regional Policy Statement and the

plan, which of course we have to have regard to and, and they‟re strong

directions as the Privy Council has told us in no uncertain terms.

30

MR BENNION: Yes, yes sir. Yes, and I accept your point, sir. I would respond

by saying, I accept that. I note that the policy 2 of the New Zealand

Coastal Policy Statement asks for consideration for matauranga Māori

to be incorporated in private plan changes, so whether or not you think

that‟s a necessary thing in this case of course is your call and reflecting 35

on these background documents as well, I accept that.

And again I point to the evidential gap I think, had in my submission

had King Salmon considered its change within that broader context. It

would have brought – ought to have brought – it hadn‟t – realised it had 40

an evidential burden there which we say it‟s had - - -

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, well of course that‟s a different - - -

MR BENNION: - - - trouble issue. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: - - - that‟s a different issue, yes.

MR BENNION: Yes. So then, sir, looking at the requirements of policy 2 of

the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement, we say the applications

here don‟t recognise continuing cultural relationships with areas of the 5

coastal environment, including places where people have lived and

fished for generations. We don‟t think it‟s been early, meaningful and

as far as practical in accordance with tikanga Māori. The private plan

change we say “it is not as far as practical in accordance with tikanga

Māori incorporate matauranga Māori”, we say “there‟s no reference”. 10

Opportunities for involvement in decision making have been provided,

we admit that, but in a very limited way, given that sites already

determined, so we say “the intent of that policy is supervened”.

15

And landscape – well, cultural assessments have been sought after sites

had been decided upon. I‟m not aware of any specific cultural

landscape assessment that‟s been sought or undertaken. Perhaps it

could be said that some of the cultural assessments do that. But I do

notice, if you go back to page 25 of appendix C of Ms Dawson's 20

evidence, she does look at the fact that the Regional Policy Statement

talks about visual character of indigenous landscapes and she simply

refers off to the Boffa Miskell, Frank Boffa‟s report on those matters.

So I‟m not sure that she‟s understood that cultural landscape

assessments might be something quite different. 25

We submit – back now at paragraph 3.18 – that New Zealand King

Salmon is reliant on evidence produced by tangata whenua themselves.

Now the Board of the Te Atiawa Charitable Trust has determined that 30

the proposal will be supported by that trust, and we‟ve heard that

evidence this morning.

We simply invite this Board of Inquiry to note the very qualified nature

of that support in terms of the materials provided. 35

Now Ms Paine attached to her evidence a “Cultural Impact

Assessment”, so that‟s part of her evidence, and I just want to make

several brief points from that.

40

[2.45 pm]

First it notes, and looking at paragraphs 93, 94, 95 – this is

Mr Wilson‟s cultural assessment which is attached. It says “a whānau

live and work in Ngamahau Bay, others work and live in Queen 45

Charlotte Sound” and then goes on to discuss in the following

Blenheim 03.10.12

paragraphs Te Atiawa understands this encroachment will take up a

majority of the bay, etcetera, it says. Then 95 Te Atiawa understands

that after extensive consultation and engagement between New Zealand

King Salmon and the whānau all outstanding issues have been

resolved. 5

So we say that‟s an indication that whānau interests are – that the

Board is seeing that, certainly in that case whānau interests are dealt

with by whānau and it accepts that result. We would argue that we are

in the same position. 10

The report also has this concluding comment, paragraph 98. “Te

Atiawa is the only one qualified to express a Te Atiawa view on how

the proposal impacts on part two matters. It appreciates that this view

may not be shared by applicants or other members of its community”, 15

and that‟s a statement that was repeated today. “Due to a lack of

consultation with Te Atiawa the New Zealand King Salmon proposals

and applications do not adequately consider or address part two matters

of relevance to Te Atiawa. However, Te Atiawa believes it has

outlined these matters, issues and potential mitigations measures in the 20

CIA and remains open to discussing the same as New Zealand King

Salmon, the EPA and the Board of Inquiry.”

So certainly in that cultural assessment there‟s an indication of some

loose ends, and certainly a discussion of the inadequate consultation 25

that occurred. Now this is an indication that members of Te Atiawa

may come to different views and express those, and it also highlights

how provisional the approval of the Board is.

The report continues: “It is with some frustration that Te Atiawa notes 30

the same level of rigour applied to the rest of proposal components has

not been applied by New Zealand King Salmon to matters specifically

relating to tangata whenua and the Treaty, again this has placed an

unfair burden on Te Atiawa to consider and respond to the proposals

within statutory imposed timeframes, we say doubly for whānau. As 35

previously mentioned, it is the Te Atiawa view that this omission

renders the applications and analysis incomplete until such as King

Salmon and/or EPA commissions and completes a tangata whenua

Treat analysis of the proposals and applications to the same level of

technical competency as other areas of analysis in the proposals and 40

applications.”

Now this is a comment made in a cultural impact assessment, which

Ms Paine attached to her evidence. “Te Atiawa acknowledges

subsequent efforts to engage while respectively asking EPA to consider 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

a more robust consideration of tangata whenua issues prior to accepting

future applications.”

So these are expressions of deep concern about the application and the

initial consultation which we say reinforce the concerns of the whānau 5

presenting to you today.

So the Board obviously is not resigning from its concern that the

application was deficient. Now, while that report concludes that a

number of initial concerns have been addressed, this is the cultural 10

impact report, it does not in many instances explain exactly how, and

here‟s a typical example, paragraph 85: “An increase in marine

mammal numbers in the area, a result of the salmon farms, means

tangata whenua may need to relocate elsewhere at a distance from

customary areas, therefore the threat of alienation is considerably more 15

than the physical area of the farm. It has the potential to disrupt

generations of customary activity.”

Then concludes: “These matters have been addressed in the formal

relationship agreement between Te Atiawa and New Zealand King 20

Salmon.” So there‟s an expression of quite broad effect on use of

areas, and it says it‟s dealt with in a relationship agreement.

Now the whānau has had no access to or engagement over that

agreement, they have never seen it. It‟s not being produced in evidence, 25

it‟s not referenced in the plan change and it doesn‟t form part of the

change. It‟s therefore unknown how and through what processes it

would or could be enforced. It has, with respect, the hallmarks of a

private side agreement that is familiar in resource consent applications,

but we would argue is not suitable for a plan change, particularly where 30

the Board is seeking to say “we‟ve dealt with the concerns of about

3,000 people in this region”, or some are living elsewhere, that‟s a side

agreement relevant to the plan change, which as I say my clients have

not seen.

35

[2.50 pm]

Other concerns in that cultural impact assessment are simply noted and

then not addressed, for example – an example here paragraph 88: “As

kaitiaki in the rohe, Te Atiawa must ensure the mauri of the moana is 40

upheld in terms of the proposal of importance to Te Atiawa is the

integrity of the water column and the health of the seabed under and

surrounding the proposed farms. There is concern that the proposed

activity may fundamentally alter marine water quality, and so the mauri

of the moana.” 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

And the whānau remains concerned about those matters, and we‟re not

sure how the Trust Board has addressed that in any particular way that

iwi, hapu and whānau can understand, giving we don‟t know what the

relationship agreement looks like.

5

Finally, in her statement of evidence for the Trust, Ms Paine continues

to express concern the proposal potentially heightens this alienation

from traditional areas, and in our view could have compromised not

only economic viability of Te Atiawa, but more importantly had the

potential to adversely affect our tikanga through its effect on our 10

customary practices. That was a concern, and she also expresses a

concern that the areas that are suitable for marine farming are fast

diminishing and if iwi katoa want to go salmon farming then it could be

argued that all the suitable available water space has been given to New

Zealand King Salmon. 15

Now, and despite protestations from King Salmon, the Board ought not

to look into this matter, its own evidence seems to confirm that this has

occurred in any event would occur with this application.

20

So we say those comments are not evidence of a positive result and

engagement of whānau, hapu and iwi in the district, in fact the reverse.

We say their evidence of accepting are fada complete and some small

crumbs from the King Salmon table. It‟s a far cry from the intentions

of the Coastal Policy Statement, the current Resource Management 25

Plans and Policy Statement and Part Two of the RMA.

So as well as a finding that the proposal is not sustainable management,

there ought to be a finding, we say that the proposal does not in terms

of Māori issues give effect to the Coastal Policy Statement, it cannot 30

because the approach taken has never allowed for matters to be

development so the decision makers can address the matters in policy

two particularly in relation to the plan change.

Now, sir, just before I go onto talk briefly about adverse effects, I do 35

want to make one further comment about the policies and plans. I think

Ms Powick this morning expressed it well when she said that the

development of the current plans, the process of developing them has

been an expression of iwi authority and self-management because of

the engagement that‟s occurred. And just briefly reflecting on that, our 40

submission is that that‟s precisely the problem with this process is it‟s

disempowered and taken away authority, which is exactly the opposite

of what the Coastal Policy Statements and Plans intend. And I think

there can be no better illustration of that, members of the Board, than

what occurred this morning, which is because of what we say is a lack 45

of ground work and hard effort by King Salmon – they have thrown the

Blenheim 03.10.12

matter over to iwi, hapu and whānau in this area, and they are here

before you with lawyers attempting to explain to you the various

nuances of their rights in this area in an adversarial setting, and that

seems to me be somewhat disempowering and not at all what the other

plan processes carefully developed in the region have avoided that – 5

they have done the hard work to try and avoid those sorts of situation,

but here we are with that situation here.

Sir, so I just want to come to 4.1 and adverse effects. The whānau

evidence is that there will be adverse local effects on treasured 10

customary areas by the proposal, which because of the approach taken

to development of it has turned out to have chosen some of the most

treasured sites of the whānau.

Now, the evidence of connection to these sites and their customary 15

values that we are presenting is uncontested, we understand its

uncontested – there‟s to be no questioning of the Mitchell Report or our

witnesses we understand. So we proceed on that basis.

So in terms of adverse effects of the proposal. Now the whānau hasn‟t 20

had the money or ability to commission relevant expert evidence, but

we do rely on biophysical and associated matters, but we do rely on the

evidence that you have before you which we think shows adverse

effects of the proposal that fall into three broad categories quite clearly

affecting customary values. 25

[2.55 pm]

The first is the presence of commercial structures and activities over

the valued sites, simply impacting their immediate use, but also their 30

setting in the cultural landscape of the whānau and as people say that is

more, that is not as bad as something else like forestry. Perhaps it is or

it is not, but from our point of view it is in the landscape, it is in these

sites, it is a quite different activity than has been there for hundreds of

years. 35

Then effects such as the attraction of marine mammals that extent

beyond the footprints of the sites and the example is given from the

Trust‟s own cultural impact assessment report and then the presence of

pollutants which grossly affect the areas immediately underneath the 40

sites, but also further afield. Now we are not engaging with the detail

of the water column evidence accept to this extent to say even in small

amounts, those pollutants have an effect on Māori and other cultural

values.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

Effects on the water column in ecology may or not be undue which is

the way I think my friend Mr Nolan put it, but they will certainly be

present and I do not think anyone is suggesting they are negligible and

I mean you will no doubt sir, draw your own conclusions on that for the

different sites, but I understand that most of the evidence says at most 5

sites, there is something that is more than negligible and that would

support the concern about the effect on spiritual values, Māori and the

like.

Accordingly the plan change and associated resource consent 10

applications have significant cultural impacts, both biophysical and

linked to that adverse spiritual effects. Now I just want to make this

point, in this respect the proposal is quite different from the situation in

the Wakatu Incorporation and Tasman District Council case which was

cited in opening submissions by New Zealand King Salmon. 15

I really should highlight how different that case is. It is commonly

cited as saying that effects on Māori and spiritual matters need at least

some link with the physical effect. Now that case concerned just the

metaphysical spiritual effect and an accepted basis that there was a 20

negligible biophysical effect going on from a water take that was

involved.

We say this is quite a different situation. We certainly have these sites

with their immediate visual impacts with the immediate seabed impacts 25

underneath and then with some pollutants going further afield. We

have got models explaining exactly how far further afield that will

occur and how dense those concentrations will be, but certainly the

effects are quite clearly there, the physical link from which the effect

on Māori builds. 30

Then just to final matters before I finish sir, the first is the relevance of

national significance, and sir, I am just making a brief point at 5.1 at

5.2 that this proposal is one of national significance according to the

Crown and New Zealand King Salmon in its opening said, “well that 35

cannot be debated” but we do not rely on that anyway. This proposal

stands on its own merits so we will take them at their word on that, but

we also know of course that the finding of national significance is a

matter to have regard to and it has to sit within all of those other

considerations that you have under the RMA recognise and provide for 40

matters under section 6 etcetera. I just make that point briefly.

Sir, just finally I want to make a brief comment on Takutai Moana

applications. Now the [Māori content 4.14] Watson whānau has

lodged these applications for customary marine title over a very 45

limited area as I understand it in East Bay. I think there is another one

Blenheim 03.10.12

for a little bit of area in the Waikawa area and also a broader

protective customary rights area and the broader customary protected

rights application affects the four sites, I think that is common ground

between ourselves and New Zealand King Salmon.

5

In order to successfully claim those rights, evidence is going to be

required of at least 170 years of use, it largely has not altered. Now

we accept that the mere fact of a PCR being applied for does not

prevent resource consents being applied for because until a PCR is

actually determined and ordered it does not have that special effect on 10

resource consents, but we disagree with the submission of New

Zealand King Salmon that parliament‟s clearly just of intent as for

PCR‟s to have a bearing on resource consents once they have been

clearly established and not while yet to be determined.

15

[3.00 pm]

We argue, and this is what I do at 6.4, that it is a matter you can

consider. The Marine Coastal Area Act provides that once PCR‟s are

finalised then in many situations they carry a kind of veto, so you 20

obviously can‟t consider them in that way, but that doesn‟t prevent the

fact that an application has been made, being considered as relevant,

and I outline four reasons there.

We‟ve got the Coastal Policy Statement referring to rights spanning 25

generations, the lodging of a claim and its being considered could be

regarded as prima facie evidence. The Act makes it clear that whānau,

hapū and iwi have customary interests in the CMA that must be

respected and considered even without a PCR order.

30

Part III of the Act provides the Minister of Conservation right now has

to consult with effected whānau over conservation initiatives in the

CMA, regardless of whether any applications have been made.

Section 66(1) says plan changes have to take into account of Part II, so 35

that would bring in 6(e) and those sorts of matters, and it could be a

relevant matter under 104.1(c) when you come to look at resource

consent.

Sir, we appreciate that the applications in this case have only recently 40

been lodged, I think the broad point is that, so the weight that you

might give them is an interesting question, but as a broad legal point, it

can‟t be the case that an application that has been in the making for

years and is just about to issue after an extensive court case is simply

something that you could not under any circumstances consider, that 45

would not seem to be correct.

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: But doesn‟t the evidence that‟s been provided by your

client, the whānau, reflect the reason for that application, and that is the

evidence before us, which we should have regard to, and the mere fact

that it also has been the springboard for an application, surely shouldn‟t

give it any more weight, otherwise we‟re double counting it. 5

MR BENNION: I guess, sir, I would simply say the fact that the application

has been made indicates a certain - well, depending where the

application is in the process - - -

10

JUDGE WHITING: I think the evidence we read was quite passionately

presented in a way which shows that they really believed in what they

were saying, and I don‟t think the application adds any more weight to

that.

15

MR BENNION: Yes, sir, I certainly stand on the evidence that we provided, I

think that‟s the case.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes.

20

MR BENNION: Sir, I would say though that this application for plan change

and resource consents, I think you‟re correct in a sense as a

springboard, but I think Mr Watson will tell you that his involvement

and concern about the Watson whānau and its interest in the foreshore

and seabed in the prior 2004 Act and now in this legislation has been 25

extended and not simply something on the spur of the moment in

relation just to this.

JUDGE WHITING: Well, by using the analogy “springboard” I wasn‟t

suggesting that it was a sudden playful thing that had just appeared in 30

the playground, nothing like that at all. Can you help me with one

matter?

MR BENNION: Yes, sir.

35

JUDGE WHITING: It‟s this, we have evidence that there is adverse effects on

Māori values in one or more of the areas that are subject to the

applications, to the sites, those that effect Te Atiwa, we have evidence

from some members of Te Atiwa and from some of the whānau, such

as your client, which we must of course have regard to and weigh it 40

against the other evidence that we have heard and put it into the

melting pot. To what extent, if any, does the fact that the Trust Board

has given evidence to the effect that it has entered into an arrangement

of some sort, which satisfies that effects on the iwi are not of such a

nature that the proposal should not be allowed? That is evidence before 45

us.

Blenheim 03.10.12

[3.05 pm]

MR BENNION: Yes, sir.

5

JUDGE WHITING: And is that really just a balancing factor between that and

what the evidence we hear or - how do we, do you see my point?

MR BENNION: Yes, sir, absolutely.

10

JUDGE WHITING: I want some assistance.

MR BENNION: And I am happy to address that. I think the first point I‟d

make is that there‟s certainly nothing in the Resource Management Act

that suggests that a decision of 10 trustees in this case of a Trust Board 15

is determinative of effects on groups, so it doesn‟t become some sort of

- the RMA doesn‟t give it any sort of a binding weight at all. So that

would suggest it is more a matter to be weighed.

It is obviously, it is a matter of evidence before you. I think what I‟ve 20

tried to express in this submission is that in two respects we have

concerns about the weight you should give to it. In this regard, the first

is that the evidence presented by the Board itself, in particular the

cultural impact assessment which has been attached, suggests that there

were quite significant concerns about the proposal as it was put up, and 25

some of those seem to be lingering in some of the statements made. So

we invite you to consider that within the Board‟s own evidence.

The second point that I have made is that we do think that it is a matter

to be carefully considered that the Board has signed this issue off on 30

the basis of an arrangement for the plan change and the consents, on an

arrangement which has not been seen by the 3,000 members it

represents, and we think that is - we understand that‟s the evidence

before you and we think that‟s a relevant matter, and I have suggested,

and I‟ve looked for law on this, and I haven‟t come to a conclusion on 35

it, but we do suggest there a great deal of caution is required about

something that appears to look like a private side agreement on a

resource consent, but is in fact being applied in part to a plan change.

JUDGE WHITING: It‟s almost tantamount to a consent, isn‟t it? 40

MR BENNION: It starts to look like that, sir.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes.

45

MR BENNION: And that raises questions about the plan change and it‟s - - -

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: In which case we can‟t take into account the adverse

effects.

MR BENNION: Well, it turns the plan change into some sort of a private 5

consenting process, but, sir, we wonder how, in terms of the 3,000

people represented, what and how through a public plan are their

interests being dealt with here. That‟s our caution about it. That‟s the

caution we invite you to note.

10

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, you‟ve obviously had the same conundrum as I

have.

MR BENNION: Yes. Sir, just finally on that matter, we also say that - we

fairly note the concerns of the Board and what they have attempted to 15

balance in their decision-making, and I think you‟ve heard the

comments on that, the future of the iwi and what‟s required, the

economic environment that we‟re in and those sorts of matters.

However, we think that‟s a governance decision the Board‟s made and

we invite you to also consider that the current plans and policy 20

statements have all been developed with the knowledge of the

economic environment and the future challenges, and those matters.

So we don‟t consider that submissions from the Board, that it is

deciding on a new governance path or approach because of the way it‟s 25

thinking about future economic conditions and those matters should

affect your view of the plans and policy statements that have been

developed in the environment we have.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, I was just looking at it in terms of the narrow issue 30

of effects against Māori cultural matters. All right, the broader policy

issues are another matter.

MR BENNION: Yes, that‟s what I think I was driving at, that those are policy

matters the Board has come to and we appreciate the complexities of 35

that, but we do think they are a separate discussion.

Sir, if there is nothing further, I will call the first witnesses.

MS ERTEL: Sir, before Mr Bennion does that? 40

JUDGE WHITING: Yes.

MS ERTEL: Could I please note for the record that we made Mrs Paine

available to give evidence? Many of the matters that have been raised 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

by Mr Bennion in his submissions ought properly to have been put to

her so that she could enlarge on them and - - -

[3.10 pm]

5

JUDGE WHITING: Hence my questions.

MS ERTEL: Well, sir - - -

JUDGE WHITING: To him. 10

MS ERTEL: Yes. Well sir, I just want to note that many of the assumptions

made in these submissions ought to have been put to Mrs Paine and

they are not accepted.

15


MR BENNION: Sir, can I just note that I had quoted the evidence presented so

I didn‟t – I certainly think I‟ve been quite fair in that regard, but my

friend‟s made a point. Sir, I have an order of witnesses set out at 20

paragraph 1.2 and I intend to – we‟ve got 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 statements that

are relatively brief. We have the Hilary and John Mitchell here. They

won‟t be presenting and I understand they can just briefly be sworn in

and affirm their report. So I‟ll call first Mr Trevor Tahuaroa-Watson

and you should have these briefs before you. 25


<TREVOR TAHUAROA-WATSON, sworn [3.11 pm]

30

JUDGE WHITING: Mr Bennion.

MR BENNION: Sorry, sir, I had switched off for a moment.

<EXAMINATION BY MR BENNION [3.12 pm] 35

MR BENNION: Can you confirm that your name is Trevor Tahuaroa-Watson?

MR TAHUAROA-WATSON: I can.

40

MR BENNION: And you‟ve prepared a brief statement of evidence for this

inquiry of some 18 paragraphs with attachments, is that right?

MR TAHUAROA-WATSON: Yes, on the 3rd day of August 2012.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

MR BENNION: All right, can you please just briefly read that to the Board,

thank you.

MR TAHUAROA-WATSON: [Māori content 2.31].

5

Greetings Commissioner, all the best.

My name is Trevor Tahuaroa-Watson. I am the senior [Māori

content] descendant of [Māori content]. Before I proceed with my

statement of evidence I would just like to make a brief statement of 10

appreciation to the Board, to the EPA and its staff, and to the New

Zealand King Salmon representatives for their courtesy in undertaking

our request, the Tahuaroa-Watson whānau request, to have this hui held

in this, our marae. Once again, thank you.

15

Indigenous people of Totaranui‟s cultural and customary rights shall be

adversely impacted should New Zealand King Salmon private plan

change application be approved. The proposal to increase aquaculture

installations in Totaranui Marlborough Sounds with its attendant

adverse effects on the environment and traditional kaimoana sources of 20

the Tahuaroa-Watson whānau and others is contrary to the declaration

of the rights of indigenous people.

New Zealand as a signatory of the International Treaty of Human

Rights, to the declaration of the rights of indigenous peoples, Article 25 25

states: Indigenous peoples have the rights to maintain and strengthen

their distinctive spiritual relationship with the traditionally owned and

otherwise occupied and used lands, territories, waters and coastal seas,

and other resources, and to uphold their responsibilities to future

generations in this regard. 30

[3.15 pm]

Taonga Sir Paul Reeves as Governor-General of New Zealand and

indigenous rights representative to the United Nations identified 35

cultural and customary practices of [Māori content 0.32] as being

continued by his Tahuaroa-Watson whānau, to be principles to which

indigenous peoples and all peoples may aspire to achieve the objectives

of Article 25.

40

[Māori content 0.57] are the ancestral [Māori content] in Totaranui

and [Māori content] where descendant Tahuaroa-Watson whānau

reside. And in their obligations to Tane, god of the forest, and Takaroa,

god of the seas moana continue their cultural and customary practices

of recognising and caring for the numerous significant sites of waitapu 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

[Māori content 2.03] spiritual marae etcetera of the whenua and the

moana.

On the passing in 1841 of [Māori content 2.19] by authority of his

whakapapa and engagements of governments through to the 1890s 5

established Tahuaroa-Watson whānau‟s kaupapa of acting in the

people‟s good. This has continued to this day evidenced by support

given descendants to Totaranui resident whānaus of [Māori content

2.55] and all their major submissions to Ministry of Fisheries, Waitangi

Tribunal claims, offers of Treaty settlements and Port Marlborough 10

Waikawa claims.

Totaranui residents, some of those mentioned, will detail in korero

specific examples and uses of the whenua and the moana, detailing

historic significant sites [Māori content 3.46] and how our whānau 15

utilised the resources for sustenance, cultural and spiritual purposes,

such as on a clear day [Māori content] the tallest peak on northern

Arapawa. The snow covered peak of Mt Taranaki can be seen

protruding from the northern moana enhancing and enforcing the

spiritual and physical dimension of the [Māori content 4.23]. 20

[3.20 pm]

Tahuaroa-Watson rangitera tupanga arrived in Totaranui in the 1820s.

You can refer to the Mitchell report bringing with them traditional 25

customary practices of harvesting, gathering and trading of [Māori

content 4.50] to sustain their tamariki, their mokopuna and their hapu.

From 1840 successive governments and authorities have permitted

structures within the Takutai Moana alienating descendant whānau and

others from substantial traditional customary areas in Totaranui and 30

Mokopeka, Otanerau, Kurateau, Tory Channel, Port Underwood, Ara-

Mahanga, [Māori content 00.42] and Rangitoto.

Private plan change short shall further alienate the Tahuaroa-Watson

whānau and others from substantial traditional cultural and customary 35

areas at Kaitapeha, Ruaomoko, Ngamahau, and Ara-Mahanga all of

which are subject to Rahui restrictions. Tapu closure, due to specific

whānau and hapu events.

Any further alienation of the cultural and customary areas shall 40

severely and adversely impact on cultural and customary rights of the

Tahuaroa-Watson whānau and indigenous peoples of Totaranui.

Tahuaroa-Watson whānau are the legitimate tangata whenua, [Māori

content 2.03] of Totaranui by [Māori content 2.07] inheritants and

[Māori content 2.10] and continuous and contiguous occupation pre-45

dating European settlement and the later established collective iwi

groups.

Blenheim 03.10.12

This kaitiaki as further evidenced by Crown acceptance of Tahuaroa-

Watson whānau application for recognition of customary title and

predicted customary rights which are authorised by legislation and

order in council so proceeding any claims perceived or acknowledged 5

authority over the customary title area.

We emphasise that consultations by New Zealand King Salmon

concerning indigenous peoples cultural and customary rights with

individuals, corporates or others having commercial aqua culture 10

interests may well be influenced by those commercial interests.

New Zealand King Salmon has provided comprehensive detail in

numerous aspects of its information documents but is lacking on the

impacts the private plan change shall have on the indigenous peoples 15

rights, their cultural and customary practices and tikanga as a result of

their failing to consult with whānau and hapu who have no

commercial aqua cultural interests and who may have assisted in

mitigating risks of siting new installations where adverse impacts on

tikanga prevail. 20

The provision for the private plan change to increase the commercial

rights of the few at the expense of the many notwithstanding the

Marlborough District Council Resource Management Plan is likely to

contravene the provisions and principal of the Treaty of Waitangi. 25

United nations of declaration of indigenous rights and have potential

for international ramifications.

[3.25 pm]

30

In defence of this unique environment, indigenous peoples rights and

to the greater good of the peoples of Totaranui, Te Hoiere, Rangitoto

and all New Zealanders, we anticipate your giving due consideration

to these matters and decline the application for the private plan change

sought. 35

Kia ora, kia ora katoa.

Thank you very much.

40

WAIATA

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora, Mr Tahuaroa-Watson.

MR BENNION: I‟m not sure if they‟ve got any questions. 45

JUDGE WHITING: I‟m just saying “kia ora”, e pea ana koe.

MR TAHUAROA-WATSON: You have any questions?

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: No questions.

MR BENNION: Sir, it‟s 3.30, I don‟t - - -

5

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, we will break for afternoon tea, shall we?

MR BENNION: Thank you, sir.

JUDGE WHITING: Thank you. 10


ADJOURNED [3.28 pm]

15

RESUMED [3.57 pm]

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, Mr Bennion.

MR BENNION: Yes sir. Just briefly on the matter of Manu Paul and 20

Rino Tirakatene, had an amicable discussion with my friends and I

think we‟ll advise them that they probably won‟t be – they won‟t be

appearing, sir, we‟ve resolved our understanding about that.

Sir - - - 25

JUDGE WHITING: Was that an amicable discussion or a “twist my arm”

discussion?

MR BENNION: It was as amicable as lawyers can be. I think things – an 30

understanding was reached, certainly.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes.

MR BENNION: Sir, just in the interest of time and where we are in the 35

afternoon, we just want to change the order very slightly and call

Hilary and John Mitchell briefly to the stand. I just want to have them

sworn and I think Mr Mitchell wants to make a brief acknowledgement

to the Board, so if we just get that done because they need to be away

today, sir. 40


MR BENNION: I understand the evidence is read and they won‟t be reading

anything. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: Yes.

MR BENNION: So I‟ll call Hilary and John Mitchell.

JUDGE WHITING: Are they giving joint evidence, are they? Yes, well swear 5

them both in.

<MAUI JOHN MITCHELL, sworn [3.59 pm]

<HILLARY ANNE MITCHELL, sworn

10

<EXAMINATION BY MR BENNION [3.59 pm]

MR BENNION: Can I just confirm that Hillary Anne Mitchell and Maui John

Mitchell?

15

MR MITCHELL: Kia ora.

MR BENNION: Yes?

MR MITCHELL: Yes. 20

MR BENNION: And you‟ve prepared a report for the Court on the Tahuaroa-

Watson whānau?

MR MITCHELL: Yes, that‟s correct. 25

MR BENNION: Yes, correct?

MR MITCHELL: Yes.

30

MR BENNION: Okay. And just confirm that‟s your evidence for this Board

of Inquiry?

MR MITCHELL: Yes, thank you, Mr Bennion and - - -

35

MR BENNION: Yes.

MR MITCHELL: - - - we're willing to answer any questions if that‟s required,

but - - -

40

MR BENNION: Yes, I understand you want to make a brief statement.

MR MITCHELL: Well, tuatahi te kaihanga [Māori content 2.41].

Acknowledgements to the great creator, to our meeting house, and to 45

our losses of the marae throughout, farewell Mr Stufford, Mr George

Blenheim 03.10.12

Duff, and Mr Laurie Duckworth. Go to the myriad, go traverse the

sacred path, farewell, farewell.

Turning to the living, greetings everyone, greetings Mr Chairman and

fellow members of the Board, greetings. 5

[4.00 pm]

Judge, what I would just like to do, is to take this opportunity to just

pick up on something that Mr Ellison said in his kaikorero this 10

morning, and I think it might be just an opportunity to share a little bit

of our respective histories, but Edward reminded us of the visit paid

back in the late 1840s to Otakou by Huriwhenua and Ngatata-i-te-rangi.

This followed a meeting that had been held some months previously

between Te Rauparaha‟s people and Te Matenga Taiaroa, which was 15

part of the peace making, the final laying to rest of the enmity that had

existed for some decades between Kai Tahu, Ngai Tahu and the top of

the south tribes and the lower North Island tribes.

As a follow up to that, Huriwhenua no [Māori content 1.21] and also 20

[Māori content], plus his cousin, Ngata-i-te-rangi no [Māori content]

paid a visit to Otakou and cemented the peace between Te Atiawa and

Kai Tahu, Ngai Tahu, and I just wanted to pick up on that and just

remind us that our two iwi do have that bit of shared history, and

[Māori content 1.50]. 25

So I am honoured to be a descendent of the sister of Huriwhenua who

took part in that peace making expedition.

But secondly, I‟d like to also pay a tribute, again to Edward‟s 30

ancestors, and it may have - this is from the Mitchell family, but it may

affect many other Te Atiawa and other southern Taranaki families as

well, [Māori content 2.27], David Te Rewa Mitchell, he was my great

grandfather. He was imprisoned at Dunedin, along with several dozen

other prisoners from [Māori content 2.36]. 35

He died before I was born, so I only have reports of him from my grand

uncles, those of his children who survived him, but apparently great

granddad had always said that had it not been for the kindness and the

manaakitanga of the Taiaroa and Ellison families many of them would 40

have died, many more of them would have died, and it may mean in

fact that had it not been for your ancestors, Edward, I might not be

standing here today, and similarly many of you may not be sitting out

there today, so kia ora iho, kia ora.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

I don‟t know what words of thanks one can use to convey what the

depth of gratitude that we owe to you and your ancestors, kia ora.

Thank you.

MR ELLISON: [Māori content 3.33]. 5

Thank you, I am humbled by your words.

Thank you for that, that‟s quite humbling, but it is an important part of

our whānau history and I think it‟s a special part of being tangata 10

whenua, reliving those links, keeping those links alive, remembering

them, and all of those things that make it special for us, and I am sure

there are probably compliments the other way that made it the reason I

am here too, and I don‟t want to go into those stories, but there are

other stories that go into our tribal histories, and so it goes two ways 15

and I think that‟s part of the reason perhaps that some of those deeds

were done.

But I haven‟t got any particular questions, doctor, on your evidence,

but I just want to compliment you on the detail and depth that you‟ve 20

provided the Board in terms of the historical account of the iwi and the

material that will support our work going forward, and I note that at the

back there that [Māori content 4.48] was involved in some of the court

hearings up here back in the 1800s determining [Māori content] here

at Waikawa. [Māori content]. 25

Thank you, thank you to you two.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, thank you, Mr Ellison. Doctor and Mrs Mitchell,

can I confirm what Mr Edward Ellison has just said about the report 30

that you presented. The fact that no one is asking you any questions I

think reflects just how good it was. It is very broad, it covers a wide

area, it‟s very thorough and it‟s very in depth, and it‟s got a lot of

interesting stories in it, so thank you.

35

DR MITCHELL: [Māori content 00.38] Judge, thank you.

<THE WITNESSES WITHDREW [4.05 pm]

MR BENNION: Sir, next is Laura Boldwer, nee Keenan. 40

MS BOWDLER: No, Bowdler.

MR BENNION: Bowdler. Sir, my apologies, I keep putting the W and the L -

it‟s hidden beneath some chocolate cake that got on my submissions at 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

afternoon break. I understand she has a presentation as well on the

overhead that will need to be set up.

<LAURA BOWDLER, sworn [4.06 pm]

5

MS BOWDLER: Kia ora, a bit scared.

JUDGE WHITING: Just relax.

MS BOWDLER: Tena koutou katoa [Māori content 2.05]. 10

Greetings, my words are a token of love and affection for those who

have passed beyond for my family, and the generations yet to be born.

Greetings to you all. This talk is my cry of love for those ancestors who 15

have departed for my whānau, for my mokopuna, forever.

Gentlemen, I just want to say Glenice and I are cousins, first cousins,

my father and her mother are brother and sister, we just sit on different

sides of the fence today, that‟s all, but we still love one another. 20

Mine is just an oral history of where I come from and where I am, and

it‟s for my mokopuna.

My name is Laura Bowdler, nee Keenan, I was born on 4 February 25

1942. I live with my husband Geoff and our whānau in Waikawa Bay,

where I have lived all my life. My father‟s name was James Henare

Kura Te Au Keenan. My mother‟s name was Lillian May Keenan, nee

Boulton. My iwi are Te Atiawa, Ngai Tahu.

30

I would like to relay to you some of our whānau history to impress on

you, the Hearing Committee, the importance that Totaranui and Kura

Te Au holds for our whānau. As you can see my father‟s middle name

was Kura Te Au, the Māori name for Tory Channel.

35

The first Keenan to live in William Keenan, born in County Cork,

Ireland, deported to Australia, he first arrived in Aotearoa on the

schooner Adventure, known to the Taranaki Māori as Tohora (the

whale).

40

The Tohora was a 29 tonne schooner commanded by John Agar Love,

Dickey Barret was the mate, Worser Hebberly was also part of the

crew. She was wrecked at Ngamotu, the Sugar Loaves, most of the

crew married into the Te Atiawa tribe.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

William Keenan was known by the Taranaki Māori as a Pakeha

tohunga, he preached the gospel and had over 600 followers. He took

part in the siege of Ngamotu, where Te Atiawa defeated the might of

the all conquering Waikato tribe under Chief Te Wherowhero.

5

But seeing their position was untenable, Love, Barret, Hebberly, Toms

and Keenan struck out for Te Awai Iti, known as Tawai, where they

knew that Captain Jacky Guard was operating a whaling station under

the protection of Te Rauparaha.

10

[4.10 pm]

Shortly after Guard moved location to Kakapo Bay, Port Underwood,

and the Tar White Shore base station was run by John Agar Love and

Dicky Barret. William was married to Hikimapu Takuna and had four 15

children. He lived out his days as a whaler and died and was buried at

Ta White on the 28th

of September 1880.

He was known as Puponga, the headland between the whaling station

and Ta White is named after him. He had hundreds of descendants in 20

which I am one. His son, William Piri Henry, was born 1839. He

married Sarah the daughter of Worser Hebley and Maata Te Naehi e

Wai. Sarah predeceased him and he went onto marry Miss Peki

Phoebe Love, daughter of Daniel and Charlotte Love (Harletta. One of

Sarah and Williams daughter married Pohare White who farmed 25

Tikimaeroro headland between Etoa and Maraetai Bay.

Their descendants still own this land and have a nice whare on it that

they share with all their extended whānau. William and Phoebe were

married at the grooms residence in Etoa Bay where William was 30

farming and building boats. We still have substantial land interests in

this bay. William and Phoebe are buried in our whānau urupa at the

head of the bay.

The Skipper whānau have interests in here also. Fred Skipper‟s wife 35

Maryanne was a Keenan. Her father was Hakare, Jack Keenan who

owned Whikanui. The Carter and Norton whānau also have property in

Etoa through William Keenan. Etoa is a special place for us and was

also a Te Atiawa Reserve.

40

William and Phoebe had a whānau of 10, one of which was my

grandfather Rewai. He was adopted by his mother‟s brother Rewai

Love, although his father and sister let him retain his Keenan surname.

William‟s senior daughter Ann married James Norton and his other

daughter Maria Mariah Harriet married Joe Toms. Captain Jackie 45

Guard had a schooner called Waterloo.

Blenheim 03.10.12

This is his first mate was James Jackson, Wersa Hebley and Patrick

Norton were his crew. So you can see that all of these early whaling

families, Keenan‟s, Love‟s, Hebley‟s, Thom‟s were all related by

marriage and subsequent generations, the other whaling families, 5

Guards, Jackson‟s, Baldicks, and Hebley‟s all intermarried also.

Ta White was in 1820s owned by Ngati Toa. Their paramount chief

was Terapraha. The whalers were all keen to purchase land of

Terapraha, especially after the Treaty was signed in 1840. The 10

Keenan‟s have land in Ta White, the land in Whikanui was owned by

Jack Keenan and in 1921 Joe Perano purchased 240 acres off the

Keenan whānau who were operating their own whaling game with their

long boats, Māori boy and Māori girl.

15

William also whaled out of Kaikoura and Endeavour Inlet. The

Keenan‟s owned land in Ta White, Whikanui, Etoa, Ngaruru, and

Anatoria, and Mokopeka, two blocks in East Bay. The Love‟s also

owned a lot of land in East Bay and on Arapawa Island. They also had

homesteads in Waikawa Bay. 20

My father was born in East Bay and a bay called Otonga, but was

raised in the next bay to the south called Tamawera. His father Rewai

along with his grandfather ran stock, gathered grass seed for sale, sold

timber for fence posts and was a fisherman and worked on Picton wharf 25

as a stevedore. The whānau from East Bay would go around to the

Love whares in Willywaka in Kura Te Au in the summer months in the

gather fish and kaimoana to preserve and store to help carry them over

the winter months.

30

My father said that it was substance living that no one seemed to have

much in the way of money, but there was never any shortage of food

because our people were so good at providing food, not just for our

own whānau, but because we were all related, we would share, not just

whānau in East Bay, but because they had homes in Waikawa as well. 35

They would share with the whānau up here as well as also provide for

the old people.

Rewai married Amiri Arthur who is how we come into Ngai Tahu and

had nine children. Five lived, Amiri was an Arthur, another prominent 40

local whānau. She and her brother Richard were the last children to be

born on Motuara Island. Rewai later farmed at Anatohia Bay. He had

a lovely old waka called the Terrill. Many of the Sounds whānau had

their own launches and dinghies that in many cases they built

themselves. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

[4.15 pm]

A favourite pastime for Soundsies was to build large model yachts,

they would hold regattas around the sounds, they called them “The

Lillypup Races” the biggest rivalry was between East Bay and 5

Endeavour Inlet.

In my father‟s time all of the Love brothers played instruments and

they would play for functions all around the Sounds. The Soundies held

regular dances in woolsheds around the Sounds, they only ever had a 10

squeeze box for music. The Love Orchestra really livened up the

dances. The Love whānau had a farm in East Bay of the larger of the

bay called Papakura Rock or Silvery Park. It was one of the finest

homes in the Sounds and the only one we ever knew that had an inside

toilet. 15

The lady of the house was called Te Amo, she was Kenemana‟s wife,

Te Amo was mad keen on ballroom dancing, so her husband built a

large room that they called “The Ballroom” on the front of the house. It

had a proper sprung floor, high ceilings and plaster mouldings and 20

chandeliers, the kauri by-fold doors used to open the room onto the

lounge where the Māori Band played. It had the biggest kitchen table

I‟ve seen, it seat 15 people. Silvery Park is still in Love ownership.

The Love brother‟s family band played all the function dances in 25

Picton and Blenheim. They were extremely popular, my father played

the banjo in the band. The main Love homestead with the largest farm

was at Anatohia. Hector Love had a large homestead that is still in

whānau ownership today, another beautiful home.

30

My grandfather, Riwai, farmed one half of the bay out to what they call

“Dan‟s Point”, named after John Agar Love‟s son, Daniel.

The two families used to share the woolshed at the head of the bay, in

fact all the families have farmed to the end of Arapawa like the 35

Watson-Tahuaroa whānau, Kenemana from Silvery Park, Loves and

Keenan‟s. Directly out in front of the woolshed are the Burial Islands

where the tipuna are buried, I have photos on the last burial to take

place there.

40

Some people call Anatohia “The Bay of Mystery”. There are a lot of

ghost stories told about unusual happenings in this bay. The mystery is

voices, the apparitions, there is part of the beach where we were told by

the old people to keep away from because in the old days there was a

massacre and people were buried in the swamp. There are even stories 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

of a ghost canoe that appears out of the fog and whānau have heard the

voice of the warriors as they pass by.

My husband and I have built a whare at Anatohia and we spend a lot of

time down there. I must say I was brought up down there as a child too. 5

Especially when our kids were little, my husband Jeff is a great

hunter/gatherer and he catches lots of pigs and deer‟s (not lately) and

still gets a feed of fish to bring home and share around the village.

We're getting a bit long in the tooth now, but we're setup down the 10

Sounds and now the next generation are making use of it. They say that

when they are aware, no matter where they live in New Zealand or

around the world that they have a spiritual connection to Anatohia, “it‟s

our turangawaewae”. Many of our whānau now have a turangawaewae

in the Sounds and many like us have their own urupa. The old people 15

told us about our myths and legends and about the sites of significance

like the legends of Kupe, the Brothers Island, Kurateau, Wheke Rock,

Whekenui, Te Awaiti, Te Uri, Karapa, Te Pangu, Haerenui, Moimoi

Island, Ngamahau, cockle beds in Deep Bay, Hitaua, Tikimaroro,

Ngaruru and Umuwheke, Ruaomoko and the maunga for Kurateau 20

which is called “Rawhiti”.

The old people regarded the Sounds as their mother and the Kurateau is

their mother‟s womb. We are very worried that this plan change

application and plan resource consent for nine farms, if granted, will 25

just the start of the beginning of another gold rush to produce water

space. All the talk is about fish farms, but if this plan change is

successful it will allow the expansion of mussel farms, seaweed,

oysters, scallop farms into what are now prohibited areas.

30

We were supported of the Marlborough District Council‟s Sounds Plan

because Totaranui is a prohibited zone. And we felt that if our

significant sites, wahi tapu and urupa were protected for all time and

because the Sounds is owned by all New Zealander‟s we felt that our

customary rights were protected. We also endorsed the right of MDC to 35

manage their own rohe and not have a central government committee

making decisions.

[4.20 pm]

40

In recent years the Ministry of Fisheries introduced the cod fishing ban

for four years. We were outraged by this originally, but have to

acknowledge the huge difference it has made to the blue cod stocks and

makes us realise that the Sounds fisheries needs to be better managed.

We‟re interest in the council‟s concept of integrated management, 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

(we're only interested), where stakeholders and community are

involved and consulted.

We see this plan change my King Salmon as a threat to our propriety

customary rights. The government are giving you (the EPA) the right to 5

give away to King Salmon an exclusive property right to large areas of

our fishing and kai moana gathering sites that we will be excluded from

forever. For them to pollute and possibly poison the surrounding kai

moana beds and threaten our birdlife, iconic species like the King

Shags and titi birds, fish life and mammal populations like the 10

dolphins, orcas and stingrays, seals we don‟t need.

These farms have changed the Sounds, and not for the better. I‟m also

worried that the nitrogen and toxins will cause algae blooms that could

poison our people who harvest and eat kai moana. The latest one in 15

Waikawa was called “paralytic bloom” that could stop your lungs and

kill you.


20

MR BENNION: Now, Laura, just at this point, I think the Board members,

you‟ve got a paragraph 48 and I think Laura you want to take that out

of the record.

MS BOWDLER: I‟ve withdrawn that actually, but it - - - 25

MR BENNION: It‟s a navigation point I think - - -

MS BOWDLER: Yes.

30

MR BENNION: - - - you were making for your husband and you told me that

you want to withdraw that, is that correct?

MS BOWDLER: Yes, I did.

35

MR BENNION: So just paragraph 48.

MS BOWDLER: And I did get it done, but it wasn‟t told to you.

MR BENNION: Yes, there must have been some slip up in our final editing. 40

MS BOWDLER: Yes.


45

Blenheim 03.10.12

MS BOWDLER: We are also disappointed that seeing we are one of the main

Māori families of Totaranui, no one from King Salmon came to consult

with us, it‟s not good enough. Just talking to iwi they don‟t own land in

Totaranui, they should have consulted whānau, hapu.

5

On behalf of my whānau I respectfully ask that you decline this

proposal in its entirety.

Thank you for your opportunity to share our history and show how

special this moana is to us and just how strongly connected we are to 10

Totaranui and Kurateau. Laura Bowdler.

But before I finish gentleman can I just you a few slides of where I

come from, where I am?

15

This is taken from the top of the pristine views of where I am now

down there, and that‟s looking at Pickersgill – Bluemine‟s right behind

it.

The same one again but it‟s a different view. That is just out from our 20

place also, the dolphins they come down and feed just about every day

around the corner and go back up again, and we don‟t want to see them

go either.

That‟s another on a real rough dirty day (keep going) and that‟s the 25

fisheries boats over in the far part, they come over from Wellington

every now and again and do a patrol, but if we have salmon farms in

the Sounds they won‟t get in.

(Keep going) and that is at Te Awaiti and the Māori boy and Māori girl 30

were the Keenans, Jacksons, Toms, Dryes. That is the last tangi, we

have a Burial Island and Anatohia an urupa and was my Uncle Bill

Keenan‟s mother.

[4.25 pm] 35

And that is why I am sitting here gentleman, is that little fella,

Ryan Spence, my moko who will not go down the Sounds just for a

day. He has to go overnight or a week. So we are going tomorrow.

But thank you gentlemen. 40

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, kia ora. I wonder Ms Bowdler if you could on this

map just show me where this lovely bay is. I can‟t find it on any of the

maps that I‟ve got. There we are, if you just mark it.

45

MS BOWDLER: There you are.

Blenheim 03.10.12

JUDGE WHITING: Madam Registrar. So it‟s just to the west of Clark‟s

Point, east of Clark‟s Point.

MS BOWDLER: Yes, that‟s right, Clark‟s Point. It used to be Dad‟s Point 5

when I was a kid.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, well thank you very much for your assistance and

kia ora.

10


MR BENNION: Sir, the next witness is Arthur Huntley.

JUDGE WHITING: Did you say Mr Huntley, Arthur Huntley. Yes, thank 15

you.

<ARTHUR HUNTLEY, sworn [4.27 pm]

MR HUNTLEY: Kia ora toko. My name is Arthur Huntley. I am 61 years 20

old and my iwi Te Atiawa, Waitaha, Ngatimamoe, Ngatikuia, Ngatiapa,

Rangitane. Our whānau have ancient ties with Totaranui, Arapawa

Island, Te Hoiere and Anamahanga, Port Gore. Our people were

invaded by Taranaki iwi. We still retained ahika. We‟ve kept the fires

burning. Our whānau has shares in two 240 acre blocks. We have a 25

urupa in Tunnel Bay.

Our whakapapa on our father‟s side our tipuna Piri Kereopa married

into the Smiths whānau. They had a daughter, Hariata, who was my

grandmother. The Smith whānau still live in the bay. Our whānau 30

have a whare in Ana-Matanga. We all enjoy spending time there

together. This bay is our tuanga wiwi and we feel a spiritual

connection to the whenua and our tupunga.

We are very concerned about King Salmon‟s plan change and 35

applications to occupy a huge area of water space in our bay. If

granted a 51 per cent Malaysian shareholding will be given for nothing

and exclusively property rights over an area that we have traditionally

fished and dived for centuries.

[4.30 pm] 40

The Government won‟t acknowledge our ownership of the foreshore

and seabed. The Takatai Moana Bill (ph 0.11) says that no one owns it

so how can the Government give you the EPA the right to give away an

exclusive property right over it. King Salmon lawyers will say this is 45

not ownership, it‟s a licence to occupy for 30 years. We don‟t want to

Blenheim 03.10.12

see any more aquaculture farms in our bay. If the application is granted

consent should be for no more than five years. If they do not comply

with conditions or of consent and are not working in with the

community the tangatawhenua their licence should be revoked.

5

We have seen the gold rush in the Sounds over the water space and

know if this is granted industry won‟t be happy until all of the bays are

full, just like Te Hoiere. King Salmon said their proposal won‟t set a

precedent. Of course it will. Because it is of national importance this

precedent will impact on every coastal inland waterway in the country. 10

This issue is not about needing more paddocks it‟s about control of

water space. I know they have changed from a controlled activity to

discretionary. I‟m not sure about that word. But MDC planners say

when the licence came up for renewal and the company can prove they

have complied then it is highly unlikely that any Council would not 15

renew it. In other words they are licensed in perpetuity.

We thought that our customary rights as tangatawhenua were rights in

perpetuity guaranteed by the Treaty of Waitangi and that the Takutai

Moana Bill protected our Public Common. Our whānau have land in 20

Te Pangu. King Salmon put a farm in the middle of the bay with no

consultation. The noise, sight and smell is that bad that none of us like

going down any more. The mud on the beach stinks. We won‟t eat the

cockles. On there the seals sun themselves on the frontage and the

hundreds of seagulls that are attracted are a nuisance. 25

So we go to Ana-Matanga instead and now they are following us up out

there. This time we want to make sure that our voices are heard and

our traditional rights are protected. As a whānau we are descendants

from the fishers and divers. We know how important it is to protect the 30

seafloor habitat. The idea of this company being allowed to lock up

90 hectares of our traditionally fishing diving grounds is unacceptable.

And to think they have gone this far without consulting us is

disrespectful. They have consulted with iwi but they should talk with

whānau, hapu, the people that own lands. 35

Papatua is a special place for us. We take our waka over there when

the wind is calm and the sea is calm. We drop our womenfolk on the

beach to gather kaimoana and get the fire going while we fish and dive.

This bay has beautiful big scallops. On the reef out to Cape Lambert 40

there‟s paua bed and we still catch groper there.

It breaks our hearts to think you would allow them to put fish farms

over the top of this wonderful habitat that has sustained our family all

these years. To smother and pollute. They say it‟s a sustainable 45

industry, the tutae from the fish will smother anything underneath, and

Blenheim 03.10.12

can they guarantee that the nitrogen, toxin and heavy metals won‟t

contaminate our kaimoana beds and our fish and birdlife.

[4.35 pm]

5

We are concerned for the King Shag and the Titi birds. If the toxins

effects the Titi birds and their numbers drop further that will result in

another customary gathering right lost to us.

This bay has lots of significant culture sites, dating back to Kupe, at 10

Tawhitinui, Cape Jackson, there is Big Bluff where Kupe hung his

fishing nets to dry. Closer to whenua is the place we call Kupe

Footprints, where Kupe and his whānau left their footprints in the rocks

as testament of their stay in our bay.

15

Please don‟t allow this plan change, we support MDC Sounds Plan, we

would like to see the Sounds better managed. We like the concept of

the Council‟s proposed Integrated Management Plan that will have

Māori stakeholders involved in the decision making process.

20

As whānau we don‟t worry about the money that could be derived from

the fish farm, we are more concerned about preserving our rights and

exercising our tikanga to ensure that moana is kept healthy for

descendants.

25

Thank you for the opportunity to speak and share our concerns.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, kia ora, Mr Huntley. Thank you.

MR HUNTLEY: Thank you. 30

JUDGE WHITING: Thank you for your presentation.

MR HUNTLEY: Thank you very much.

35


MR BENNION: The next speaker is Johnny Norton.

<JOHN NORTON, affirmed [4.37 pm] 40


MR BENNION: Just pause there, Mr Norton. Was there a PowerPoint that

was to go with your presentation? So you‟ve got your evidence there, 45

Mr Norton.

Blenheim 03.10.12

MR NORTON: That‟s right, yes.

MR BENNION: Can you just confirm your name is John Norton and your iwi

is Te Atiawa, Ngai Tahu? 5

MR NORTON: That‟s correct.

MR BENNION: All right, and you‟ve prepared this evidence. Can you just

start reading it for the Board. You can sit if you wish. 10

MR NORTON: Okay, I‟ll try it this way for a start, I think.

My name is John Norton. My iwi are Te Atiawa, Ngai Tahu. I have

lived in Picton all my life and I come from a large whānau, I am one of 15

15 children. We are descendants from Patrick Norton, born in Ireland

and transported to Australia. He escaped from Tasmania, boarding a

whaling vessel bound for New Zealand.

He met Jackie Guard and crewed for him on her ship “The Harriet” that 20

was shipwrecked off the Taranaki coast. He was 46 years old when he

came to Toe.

Patrick married Makareta Tangitu, they begat four children, Thomas,

James, Richard and Margaret. We came off the James Norton line, he 25

married and lived at Tawhi, they begat 13 children, my grandfather,

Thomas, being one of them. My grandfather had six children, my

father‟s name was Thomas also. He was married twice and had 15

children, so I am a fifth generation.

[4.40 pm] 30

There is five generations of whalers living at Tawhi, my father was the

first to work on motorised chasers, he was a gunner and I followed in

his footsteps. The whaling station closed down in 1964, my brothers

Tom, Colin and I were the last of the Norton whalers from 1832 to 35

1964.

My wife Myrna and I had seven children. I have 13 grandchildren and

three great grandchildren, so there is eight generations of Norton in the

Sounds. 40

When people think of whaling in Cook Strait, the name Perano always

comes up, but they forget that our Māori families have been whaling

for generations before they arrived on the scene in 1911. The Norton‟s

whaled for a 135 years. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

Many of our families worked out of the shore base station at Tar White

over the years the, Guards, Barrett‟s, McKennan‟s, Tom‟s, Heberley‟s

Jackson‟s, Love‟s, Baldrick‟s, and of course Norton‟s.

My grandfather was an oarsman, my father didn‟t crew the long boats, 5

but remembered as a child all the kids would rush down to the beach

when the long boats came in. It was their job to put around the rollers

and the sides of fence posts in the water and cover them with seaweed.

The boats would come in fast and shoot halfway up the beach.

10

The Heberleys were the first to operate a factory at Te Rua Bay. The

Perano‟s purchased the first whaling station of Hepe‟s in 1911. Their

first chasers were displacement launches, but by the 1920s they were

having high speed planning hulls built and fitted American engines to

power them. they were capable of 40 knots. 15

They moved the station closer to the entrance at Tipi Bay. The Tipi

Bay operation was a partnership involving several representations of

whaling families, Jo and Charlie Perano, A Heberley and W Toms, C

Toms, and my father Tom Norton Junior. 20

Joe split up the partnership, bought the land off Whekenui, off Jack

Keenan, to develop the farm and started his own station. The two

companies competed for a time until Charlie closed down Tipi Bay.

25

Joe bought out his debts and most of the workers, equipment and

chasers, joined and worked as one Fishing Bay, which is good because

the raru raru competition caused divide in our Sounds community.

The majority of workers at Fishing Bay were Māori, many of the 30

workers took their families to live down there. Old Joe would give

them some second hand iron and some timber and say “build yourself a

whare”. After the war they used a lot old army huts that came from the

army camp on Whekenui Bay. They were pretty rough, it was a bit of

ghetto really. 35

I started whaling in 1958. Many of the whaler‟s wives and families

lived at the station. But we had four little one under four, and we had a

new house in Picton, so my wife stayed up in town and I stayed on

Tuatea, Peranos mother ship. 40

However, a time of great sadness, we lost our four month old son Rex

to cot death. My wife said, “that‟s it, we‟re coming with you”, so I

built another bedroom on the old whare whalers station at Tawhi,

where were we quite comfortable living. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

The whalers had a school at Whekenui, my children were too young to

go there. It was great living Tawhi because my cousins have lived

there and it felt like we belonged there. You could feel the old people

all around you. The old whare had been added onto the back of the old

original whaler‟s whare, and all the photos of our tipuna around the 5

walls give a wonderful atmosphere.

The whaling season was a short season, beginning in May through to

the second week in August. My dad had a few boats, one was called

Kina, me and my older brother Tom owned a forty-footer together 10

called the Hinemoa. When he wasn‟t whaling he used to go fishing,

cray fishing, netting and long lining in Tory Channel in the Cook Strait.

He worked as a water-sider at Picton Wharf and was a solo butcher at

the Picton Freezing Works. Somehow he raised 15 children and sent

five of them to boarding school. I went to Hato Paora College in 15

Feilding.

[4.45 pm]

When the whaling season finished you used to go fishing and dredging 20

for kinas, selling to the Māori‟s at Wairau Pa and Blenheim. He had

the first official shellfish licence issued dredging kina. He knew the

kina beds in Tory Channel intimately.

I did my time as a boat builder, my boss being Jack Morgan, who used 25

to build whale chasers, and then later on I became a carpenter. My

brother, Tom, started whaling about five seasons before me, we were

both gunners, although we didn‟t spend a lot of time fishing during the

season, our women folk did, there was so much fish around in those

days you didn‟t have to try hard to get a feed. 30

After the whaling finished in 1964 I worked on the Cook Strait Power

Scheme at that stage. I then worked as a butcher at the Picton freezing

works, some of my mates started diving commercially for paua in the

weekends and they were making more than I was making for a week‟s 35

wages, so when the freezing work season finished, my mate Jeff

Bowdler and I went paua diving. For the record the first commercial

paua divers were Johnny Bunt, Dick Thacker, Colin Norton, Boots

Buckland, and George Johnson.

40

It was really an untouched resource, there were thousands of them, but

they earlier had little value. If we had kept proper records when the

quota system came in we would have become overnight millionaires, as

it was we got nothing.

45

Blenheim 03.10.12

I have talked a lot about the whaling and fishing and about Tar White

because I want the hearing committee to understand how connected our

Māori whānau are to our ancestral land, our tipuna are buried in our

own Urupa, we respect our culturally significant sites whether we still

own them or not, we have a spiritual connection to these places. 5

I have four generations of tipuna buried in our Urupa at Tar White, I

also have two of my sons buried there and I have prepared my own plot

between my boys for when my time comes.

10

We just took my sister‟s ashes down there last month to be buried

alongside her grandparents.

In the old days the whalers used whale jaw bones instead of

headstones, over the years they rotted away in the ground, but we have 15

a fair idea where they all are.

We have fished every inch of` the coastline of Kura Te Au, we know

where all the best fishing spots are, where the deep holes are for

crayfish and groper holes, we know were the kina beds are and the best 20

places to gather paua.

If` a company want licenses to occupy public water space shouldn‟t

they have to consult with the old families like ours, no one from King

Salmon has asked my opinion. 25

These fish farms are sited over some of the best traditional fishing and

kaimoana gathering habitat, Te Pungu ha a great kina bed, then they

took what was a great kina, paua crayfish habitat at Te Uira Karapa

(Clay Point) and now they are wanting one of the most sheltered 30

fishing spots in the channel, we could always guarantee to catch fish on

the reef on either side of Ngamahau. They, King Salmon, should be

content with the areas they have already taken, and be grateful for what

they have got.

35

So many people fish and dive Tory Channel, it is special to Māori

especially, for our families it is our garden, our food basket, we have

always been happy to share with recreational fishers.

King Salmon, however, with these huge structures have an exclusive 40

property right and the farms, by their design, dominate the landscape

with their two storey dormitories. I wonder if they have sewerage tanks

built into them? Do you think I would be allowed to have a two story

guest house in Tar White Bay? The smell, the noise, the lights at night,

the hundreds of seagulls and dozens of seals, these things are foreign, 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

they shouldn‟t be there, they make me feel angry when I have to detour

around them.

How can they even consider putting two farms at Ruaomoko? That is

the most popular recreational fishing spot in the Sounds and the King 5

Salmon experts say they are not a risk to navigation.

I have eliminated paragraph 38 here.

[4.50 pm] 10

Don‟t these experts know how violent the storms can be in these areas

and how important it is to be able to hug the shoreline under the lea of

the shore if its blowing over 50 knots of southerly and you are dodging

whilwaws you don‟t want a bloody great fish farm in your path. Us old 15

timers who were I taught by the old pulling boat whalers know how to

work the back eddies and keep out of the stronger tidal flows by

hugging the inshore. These farms will force us to be 600 metres out if

we are exceeding five knots, that puts us out in the stronger tidal flow,

our trips will take longer and subject us to rougher water. So they are 20

not just excluding us from our traditional fishing grounds they are

forcing us to change the navigational practises we have developed over

five generations.

I would like to see the Sounds better managed by an integrated 25

management structure, and want you, the committee, to know that our

Sounds families are supportive of the MDC Sounds Plan, my sister was

a MDC councillor and so our family had input into that plan.

We don‟t want to see our Sounds privatised and industrialised. It is a 30

wonderful treasure to our families. It is sacred and should be kept as a

recreational area for all New Zealanders and not privatized for short

term gain.

It hurts me to know that the Te Atiawa Trust have decided to take the 35

30 pieces of silver offered to them by King Salmon. This has caused a

division in our community, dividing families and friends. Nowhere is

this more relevant than the rift between Te Atiawa Trust and their

beneficiaries.

40

I thank you for listening to me and letting me tell our family‟s story.

Remember that our tipuna were among New Zealand‟s first Pakeha

settlers, on our Māori side we have traditional rights that we are not

prepared to just give away, we deserve more respect than has ever been

shown by King Salmon. 45

Blenheim 03.10.12

Kia ora.

JUDGE WHITING: Kia ora, Mr - sorry.

MR BENNION: Mr Norton, I did notice that you - I just want to confirm that 5

you left off a couple of paragraphs?

MR NORTON: Yes, I did.

MR BENNION: Can I just quickly - so we should remove paragraph 21, is 10

that right, I don‟t think you read that out?

MR NORTON: 21, it was about a two liner.

MR BENNION: “We worked hard and when we got to town we played hard.” 15

MR NORTON: That‟s right. Don‟t tell everybody.

MR BENNION: You left that one in? So should we leave that one in?

20

MR NORTON: I‟ll leave that up to you.

MR BENNION: Okay. I just had another, paragraph 38, there‟s a talk there

about a boat capsizing with Tom Hitchens and Boots Buckland, did you

mean to read that out or leave that? 25

MR NORTON: Yes, well, we talked about it but I didn‟t think I intended that

to be in there when I was being given a hand with this.

MR BENNION: Okay. 30

MR NORTON: So I will leave that in.

MR BENNION: Shall we leave it in?

35

MR NORTON: Yeah.

MR BENNION: Yes, so do we assume that whatever‟s written is in, if you

didn‟t read it out it‟s still part of your evidence?

40

MR NORTON: That‟s right.

MR BENNION: Okay, and you adlibbed at the end I think about the -

something about some silver, but I - that‟s all I heard.

45

MR NORTON: I didn‟t say that. Is that it?

Blenheim 03.10.12

MR BENNION: I don‟t think - yes, anyway, yes, thank you.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, thank you, Mr Bennion. Yes, kia ora, Mr Norton,

thank you. 5


MR BENNION: Sir, so the final witness is Mr Bosun Huntley.

10

<BOSUN HUNTLEY, sworn [4.54 pm]

JUDGE WHITING: Sorry, Mr Bennion, it‟s five to five, and I see this witness

has got 104 paragraphs.

15

MR BENNION: Yes, sir, we would prefer to take the break and start in the

morning.

JUDGE WHITING: Yes, so we will adjourn until 9.30 tomorrow morning.

20

MR BENNION: Thank you, sir.


KARAKIA 25

MATTER ADJOURNED AT 4.58 PM UNTIL

THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER 2012

transcript of proceedings board of inquiry new …€¦ · transcript of proceedings board of...

Documents