Go to next talk

 

Kevin Prime

Title: “A perspective from an ex-conservation board member and a case study from Ngätihine”

Environmental Co-ordinator, Te Rünanga o Ngätihine, Tipene Road, Motatau R.D. 1, Kawakawa, Northland

Email: phlmot@xtra.co.nz

 

Talk

Discussion

 

Kevin Prime is the Environmental Co-ordinator for Te Rünanga o Ngätihine. He is also a farmer and forester from Motatau in Northland and the father of 13 children.

 

Abstract

Firstly, the perspective of a person who has spent 15 years on a number of national boards, Ministerial Advisory Committees, regional committees and advisory boards, plus several local boards and committees.  While a great deal of experience has been gathered in forestry, farming, Mäori land development, conservation, health, environmental matters, education, justice and economic development, the main thrust of this address will focus on conservation and environmental experiences.

 

On the Northland Conservation Board there was the new experience of being inundated with screeds upon screeds of information on a regular basis.  There were reports from scientists, compliance and law enforcement, advocacy, regional conservator, kaupapa atawhai, threatened species, area managers etc.

 

There were the innumerable boring board meetings, the sub-committee meetings on planning, the executive, on the conservation management strategy, on Mäori issues (be it an historical Pä site, a wähi tapu or a treaty issue), or the special meetings on a pest management strategy, or even chairing Te Pataka o Taitokerau for the allocation of cultural materials.

 

There were the exciting and memorable field trips to forest reserves, to island sanctuaries, to sites of special significance, to see the rare kökako, to sand dunes, to gum fields, to historic sites, to field centres, to see rare and endemic species.

 

But alas, there was no real conservation.  We saw a lot, heard a lot, we read a lot, we passed several resolutions, but we did not save one bird, nor did we kill one pest or weed

 

Until...............

 

I resigned form the Northland Conservation Board, went back home and started the Ngätihine “Kaitiakitanga o te Kuku” restoration programme in conjunction with Landcare Research and the Department of Conservation

 

That’s conservation: completely ring fencing the forest; destroying every possum within 2 kilometres; seeing the forest health recover; increasing in the bird life; seeing an improvement in the water quality; working with positive thinkers and enthusiasts

 

But there are still the boring things to be done. Heads of Agreements must be signed; pest control logistics and strategies to be discussed and agreed on

 

The big difference is that there is tangible evidence of “kua hoki mai te mauri o te ngahere”.  The life essence of the forest has returned.

 

Go to top of page

Talk

Over the last 15 years I have spent some time on a number of national boards, Ministerial Advisory Committees, regional committees and advisory boards, plus several local boards and committees.  My interests have been quite varied so during this period I have gathered a great deal of experience in a number of fields such as forestry, farming, Mäori land development, conservation, health, environmental matters, education, justice and economic development.  However, the main thrust of this address will focus on conservation and environmental experiences.

 

As an inaugural Northland Conservation Board appointee there was the novel experience of being inundated with a plethora of information on a regular basis.  Every Thursday an envelope three quarters of an inch thick (or thicker) arrived in the mail from our executive officer with more and more information being churned out by the conservation boffins from all around the country.  There were reports from scientists, compliance and law enforcement, advocacy, the Regional Conservator’s issues, Kaupapa Atawhai, threatened species, area managers concerns etc.  There were reports from the Conservation Authority, Minister’s press releases and speeches.  A lot of it was really interesting information.

 

There were the boring board meetings, the sub-committee meetings on planning, on the executive, on the conservation management strategy, on Mäori issues (be it an historical Pa site, a wahi tapu or a Treaty issue).  There were special meetings on a pest management strategy and even chairing Te Pataka o Taitokerau for the allocation of cultural materials.

 

There were also the exciting and memorable field trips to forest reserves such as Waipoua, Puketi, Warawara or Manginangina, or to island sanctuaries like the Hen and Chicken Islands, to sites of special significance, to see the rare kokako, to sand dunes of North Hokianga, to gum fields of Ahipara, to historic sites like Ruapekapeka Pa, to field centres, to remote sites accessible only on FWD vehicles to see rare and endemic species.

 

Being on the Northland Conservation Board I was privileged to meet many dedicated, enthusiastic and ardent employees and advocates in the area of Conservation.  It was so uplifting to be part of an elite group of conservationists who shared common concerns and who really wanted to do something about conservation in this country.  But alas, there was no real conservation.  We saw a lot, we heard a lot, we read a lot, we met a lot, we talked a lot, we passed several resolutions, but we did not save one bird.  Nor did we kill one pest or weed.

 

Until ... I resigned from the Northland Conservation Board in 1996 (just after having been reappointed for a third term), went back home and started the Ngätihine “Kaitiakitanga o te Kuku” restoration programme in partnership with Landcare Research and the Department of Conservation at the Motatau State Forest.

 

This was real conservation.  We completely ring fenced the forest; destroyed every possum within 2 kilometres; saw the forest health recover, increases in the bird life; an improvement in the water quality; and we worked with positive thinkers and enthusiasts.

 

We set up and co-ordinated a Wildlife Control Training programme where we taught unemployed people pest control, bush skills, helped them to get gun licences and cyanide licences.  In the process we killed lots and lots of possums, goats, mustelids and rodents.

 

All this did not happen overnight though.

 

Taking responsibility for conservation at Motatau: an Environmental Beginning

In 1989 Te Rünanga o Ngätihine first made representation to Government for Management of the Motatau State Forest.  Rather than take a case to the Waitangi Tribunal, the Rünanga chose to use its resources to protect the forest through pest control and fencing.  As a result of this “leading by example” the Minister of Conservation in 1994 saw fit to hand back management of the Motatau State Forest to Te Rünanga o Ngätihine.  We owe many thanks to the late Maurice Alemann, our land consultant, for the free services he put into making this handover a reality.  The resulting declaration signed by the then Minister of Conservation Dennis Marshall is a small memorabilia with such major significance to Ngätihine.

 

The exchange of gifts at the handing over ceremony was significant.  One of our kuia Te Para Waititi presented Mr Marshall with a kete to which were appended replicas of the three baskets of knowledge.  The Minister in turn handed to our Rünanga chairman a beautifully turned wooden taraire bowl.  Our chairman upon accepting the gift was heard to remark “It is fitting that you have given us an empty bowl Minister, because whenever we need the resources to manage this forest we will be coming back to have the bowl filled.”

 

Kaitiakitanga o Te Kuku

In 1995 we began detailed planning involving several meetings with representatives from Landcare Research, Department of Conservation and Rünanga personnel leading to a project called “kaitiakitanga o te kuku” or protection and stewardship of the native wood pigeon.  Research by Te Rünanga o Ngätihine in conjunction with Landcare for the project started in July 1996 with Rachael Bell, Ngätihine workers and I gathering data and finding kuku nests.  Later we used radio-tracking to find nests, but it was not always this easy.  The first nests had to be found without any of this sophisticated equipment.  Ngätihine workers and the DOC workers measured foliage density.  Once a nest was found it was necessary to set up the video camera for 24 hour monitoring.  Our first nest provided the groundbreaking evidence of a possum eating the kuku eggs.  From a Ngätihine point of view that should have been conclusive proof that intensive pest control was the answer.  Not so, said the scientists: “there need to be at least 20 nest failures to be conclusive”.  After some discussion a compromise was reached whereby the data collection carried on throughout the 1996 breeding season and part way into the 1997 season.

 

At the same time (in 1996) the Department of Conservation in conjunction with the two Ngätihine workers, Derek Wano and Darryl Johnson, were putting in navigation lines, tracks and bait stations at 150x100 metre intervals throughout Motatau. They also set up rat tunnels for monitoring the rats and mice, and possum trap lines for monitoring possum densities.  During that period 13 nests were monitored.  The research documented 13 nest failures.  The egg that lasted the longest lasted just one week  - and only because it was on an isolated ponga tree.  There were cases when the nest was found on one afternoon, by the next morning when the scientists took all the equipment up to set up, the nest had already been predated.

 

In late September 1997 through to 13 October we started pre-feeding, i.e. filling the bait stations with a dried fruit mix to get the possums, rats and mice used to feeding from these stations.  This was a weekly event for 3 weeks.  On 20 October 1997 we did our big hit with 1080, a deadly poison.  The effects were almost immediate.  Our scientist monitored 5 nests during the remainder of that season (1997/1998).  Of those 5 nests there was one infertile egg, but 4 managed to hatch.  As there were still infiltrations of possums from outside the forest, we still lost 3 of those chicks during the chick growing period.  But we had our first successful fledging on 10 February 1998, at 4:37pm.  This was only achieved through intensive trapping around the nest tree where 22 possums were caught up until the chick fledged.  Obviously there was a need to create a buffer zone around the forest.

 

In March 1998 we called a meeting of all the immediate landowners surrounding the forest to enlist their support.  This meeting included representatives from 5 neighbouring properties, Landcare Research, Department of Conservation and Te Rünanga o Ngätihine.  All neighbours gave their full support to this proposal allowing us to carry out pest control on their properties.  Carter Holt Harvey were most helpful in carrying out intensive pest control on their land plus assisting on the buffers in neighbouring blocks.

 

The results were phenomenal.  We monitored 7 nests during that 1998-1999 season and 7 chicks hatched and fledged.  So from a 100% failure rate in 1996-1997 we progressed to a 100% success rate two years later.  In partnership with the Department of Conservation and Landcare Research, Ngätihine have succeeded in turning a declining native wood pigeon population at Motatau into a very successful native pigeon recovery programme.  It is now seen as a leading example of community environmental enhancement in New Zealand. 

 

There was also evidence of mahoe recovery after possum control.

 

Extending effort

But we have not stopped there.  Te Rünanga o Ngätihine are in the process of using Nga Whenua Rahui funding to purchase four neighbouring indigenous forests from private landowners.  This would double the area of forest being managed by Ngätihine.

 

On the 19th of May 2000, Te Rünanga o Ngätihine were involved with the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society in the launching of a very successful bilingual kukupa advocacy poster at the Motatau Marae.  Over 200 people from all around the country witnessed this memorable occasion.

 

There are still the boring things to be done; meetings must be held, Heads of Agreements must be signed, pest control logistics and strategies to be discussed and agreed on; contracts need to be signed.  But the big difference is that there is tangible evidence of “kua hoki mai te mauri o te ngahere”, the life essence of the forest has returned.

 

Conclusions

 

Where to from here?

Ngätihine has proven that if given similar levels of funding, iwi can manage government resources as well or even better than government departments.  The question could well be asked “Where do we go from here?”  We could rest on our laurels, pat ourselves on the back and think what a good job we have done, or we could endeavour to do even better through widening the scope of our kaupapa throughout Taitokerau and even Aotearoa.

 

Hauora Whanui (which is in fact Hauora Ngätihine) have been successful in extending well beyond the recognised boundaries of Ngätihine.  For our restoration of the native wood pigeon to be really successful it needs to be implemented throughout Taitokerau.  If our success is replicated in other iwi areas and then extended outwards our buffers will eventually overlap.

 

Ngätihine has made the declaration of war against possums, rodents and mustelids north of the Tamaki river.  The challenge now is making it happen.

 

Kia ora ano tatou katoa.

 

Go to top of page

 

Discussion

 

Question/Comment (Gerry Eckhoff, ACT member of Parliament, recovering farmer)

Good morning.  I am absolutely proud and privileged to be amongst you today and this is my first hui so it’s something very, very special.  I was just so totally impressed with what you had to say, but I wonder whether in fact you haven’t quite clearly identified the problem that we face in conservation.  Is there a problem or is the real answer in this concept of Government and management being controlled by the same entity  - the Department of Conservation?  In my opinion, they are in the rather fortunate position of giving advice to themselves that they would rarely, if ever, ignore.  I think you have shown why a Government Department should remain at that level but in fact the management of the forests, of the fishery, of the tussock grassland, should remain and stay with the tangata whenua, the people who actually understand how these things work.  I would be interested in your comments as to whether in fact there should be a very clear distinction between government and the management by the people of the land.

 

KP - Thank you for that.  I actually think the problem is that we talk too much and we plan too much.  We have things like strategic plans, operation plans, management plans, financial plans.  We plan all the time and we don’t do a damn thing.  Why the heck don’t we go outside and bash a possum on the head and kill the darn thing or run it over?

 

For a long time I’ve believed that many iwi can manage the resources very well.  I’ve sat on lots of committees about policy in that area.  I really think policies are things that you write down and then stick in the drawer.  You pull it out when something goes wrong to say “Oh what was the policy on that?” I’m not a fan of that.  But I do acknowledge what you are saying, there is a differentiation between the governance and management.  But there still needs to be a connection between the two.  I have found that when on Boards of Trustees.  I have been a Chairman of a College Board for 15 years and I’ve seen that you still need someone from the government’s side to be talking with the principal to be able to implement what government wants.  The best thing is to let the managers get on with managing and the governors get on with governing.

 

 

Question/Comment (Rangimarie Te Maiharoa, Waitaha)

Tënä koe Kevin.  Tënä koutou, tënä koutou, tënä tatou katoa.  I am Waitaha and I would like you to please remember that.  Kevin is quite versed in Mäoridom as you can see here and as you heard him speaking last night.  What I would like Kevin to just briefly speak to you about is the spiritual values that Mäori people pay to our indigenous ngahere, but even more so, to the conservation side of our beautiful land.  I can’t go back far enough, but I always feel very, very proud to think of our ancestors (when they stepped ashore here) and the prestigious state that this land was in.  In contrast, today we can see what kind of a mess we’ve made of it.  I think a lot of it is because we’ve lost the spiritual values.

 

KP - Thank you Rangi.  I should admit my first language is Mäori.  I could probably answer a question like that in five minutes in Mäori but in English it would take me too many words.  Suffice to say that if you go way back to Io Matua Kore, then Io Matua and then down to Rangi, Papa and then all the other gods like Tane, Rongo, Tumatauenga, and all the others; we then come down to human beings.  It all traces back to Mäori’s inherent belief in being part of the land.

 

I enjoyed an earlier comment about the word Mäori being replaced by the word community.  That’s an interesting one.  Just before this conference started I was speaking on my cell phone to our Chairman of Te Rünanga o Ngätihine up North.  He said, “The ripples have already started.”  I knew what he was talking about because the Te Rünanga o Ngätihine put in a submission to the District Plan suggesting that the word “Mäori” be taken out of the plan where it discriminates and disadvantages other people in the society.

 

We gave our definition of what the word tangata whenua means.  People have said “you are not tangata whenua”.  Have you ever heard that?  We have actually defined what we feel tangata whenua really means.  When a person settles on a bit of land and plants crops, the crops (roots) go down and take up nourishment from the earth: that is the beginning of a person’s tangata whenua status.  When he eats that crop (whether it’s kumara, cabbage or whatever), the land starts to become part of his body.  Now when a child is born in a certain area, the whenua or placenta is normally buried in that land.  That effectively severs the link between the maternal mother and the child, and links the child up with mother earth.  The final part of that association with the land is when the person dies and is buried in that land.  All the descendants after that are actually tangata whenua.  So a person could start to become tangata whenua in about three weeks if he plants something like radish!  That’s if it grows and he eats it.  I am saying essentially that we believe that everyone born in New Zealand are tangata whenua.  Even a foreigner who comes in and plants crops, is starting to become tangata whenua.  

 

We were suggesting that the word “Mäori” should be taken out of the Far North District Plan.  If you look in the dictionary the word “Mäori” actually means ordinary.  We talk about wai Mäori, that’s fresh water or ordinary water.  In Article 3 of the Treaty of Waitangi, Hugh Kawharu accurately translates the word “Mäori” as “ordinary”  - which is exactly right.  I could imagine how the word “Mäori” came to refer to a race.  The early settlers would have asked Mäori “He aha koutou?”  (What are you?)  To which Mäori would have replied “He Mäori matou”  - meaning “We are ordinary”.

 

I’m sorry Rangi, there wasn’t really enough time to talk too much on this topic.

 

Go to top of page

 

Go to next talk