Whangaroa Ngahere Scoping Report

“Ka pupū te au
Ka tōtōtia e ngā taurahere a Māui
Ka whitia te āniwaniwa
Ka hikitia, ko Whangaroa e”

“The mist covered land

Bound by the deeds of Māui
Is radiated with colour and light.
As Whangaroa emerges” i

VISION STATEMENT
That tangata whenua, whānau-hapū, and local communities of Whangaroa are connected
and actively responsible in restoring, enhancing and protecting the mauri and unique
biodiversity of Whangaroa ngahere.

1
 Karakia

Ma te whakatau ka mohio,
By discussion comes understanding

Ma te mohio ka marama
By understanding comes light

Ma te marama ka matau
By light comes wisdom

Ma te matau ka ora
By wisdom comes life

Cover page Photograph:

Mist spilling over Taupo Bay (Source: Sophie Wells, Instagram Post, 12 July 2018)

Disclosure

Miro Tapui Ltd is owned and operated by Thomas Hawtin and Robyn Tauroa. Both are members of
the local community with affiliation to various Whangaroa hapū and other organisations, and have
experience in hapū research processes.

We have undertaken this exercise with a primary focus on restoring the overall health of our Ngahere,
and supporting those groups and individuals whom exercise positive relationships focussed on forest
health restoration.

The Findings and Recommendations provided within this Scoping Report have been independently
compiled and are not neccessarily endorsed by the commissioning agency, that being the Department
of Conservations, Bay of Islands.

2
 CONTENTS

Karakia 2

Contents 3

Lists of Photographs, Maps & Illustrations 4

Introduction 5

Background 5

Whangaroa Ngahere 6

Planning framework 7

Vision 9

Resourcing Stakeholders 11

Administration & Communication 14

Social & Cultural Aspects
• Tikanga 16
• Whānau-Hapū 17
• Kaitiaki 18
Biological & Technical Aspects
• Matauranga 20
• Tools & Technology 21
• Maramataka 22

Summary of Findings 23

Recommendations 24

Annex A: Scoping Narrative 26

Annex B: Organisational Profiles & SWOT Analysis 28

Annex B: References 30

3
 List of Photographs
No Description Source Page
1 Mist over Taupo Bay Sophie Wells, Instagram Cover
2 Whangaroa Harbour entrance Whangaroa papa Hapū collection 8
3 Fuschia Procumbens Andrew Townsend 9
4 Pekapeka Bay Miro Tapui 16
5 Trapping Workshop & Kiwi Erica Whyte, Taupo Bay Land & 17
Release, Taupo Bay Coastal Care
6 Kaitangata Kaitiaki, Te Komanga Miro Tapui 19
7 Taipa Students, Pekapeka Bay Miro Tapui 19
8 Whangaroa Students, Kerikeri NZ Gazette 19
9 Trapping Workshop, Matangirau Whangaroa papa Hapū 21
10 Coastal Pohutukawa Mahinepua-Radar Hill Land Care 22

List of Maps
No Description Source Page
i Whangaroa Ngahere DoC GIS 6
ii Wildlife Corridor Vision Reconnecting Northland 10
iii Stoat trap lines in Puketi Forest Dr. Gary Bramley 13

Illustrations
No Description Source Page
A Planning Tool Miro Tapui 7
B Whānau-Hapū Model Miro Tapui 24

List of Tables
No Description Page
One Potential Funding Sources 11
Two Potential Organisation Analysis 15
Three Proposed Steps for Ngahere Planning & Implementation

4
 Introduction
This Scoping Report is provided following a short scoping exercise conducted by Miro Tapui
Ltd for the Department of Conservation, Bay of Islands Office.
It is intended to guide a Whangaroa Ngahere long-term planning strategy yet to be
undertaken.

Methodology
The methodolgy employed in this exercise was aimed at determining relationships of the
community to Whangaroa Ngahere through:

• Literature review to identify existing information and potential gaps

• Community engagement to identify current activities, visions and aspirations
• Identification of potential contributors to the long-term plan.
• Provision of a clear, understandable and inclusive framework for the development of
a long-term plan
A detailed narrative of these methodologies is provided at Annex A.

Background
Whangaroa has a diverse history apparent through the ages and movements of various Hapū,
through the arrival of settlers of European origin, to the present where people come and go
according to life style choices and circumstances, opportunity to own land, and the currency
of a global economy.
As the issue being addressed here is one of environmental degradation, and particularly the
poor state of Whangaroa ngahere, we must find ways in which the different people of
Whangaroa can be supported collectively to address those issues.
For the purposes of scoping a long term plan, we have adopted a socio-cultural framework
that accords with the principles of collaboration, and avoids the problems of a top heavy
monopolyii.
The different aspects of the plan outlined in this report have been determined by that model,
and the credibility of the various ideas and concepts researched, have been measured against
its ideals.

5
 Whangaroa Ngahere

Map i: Whangaroa Ngahere

This report aims to provide a strategy for the development of long term forest health plan(s)
for Ngahere situated within the rohe or region of Whangaroa, that being:
“commencing at the river mouth of the Oruaiti River in the north and moving in a
southerly direction encompassing the Puketi Forest, then moving in a north-easterly
direction to the Takou River area. The coastal boundary commencing at the Oruaiti
River mouth following the eastern side of the Mangonui Harbour out to the entrance
of the Mangonui Harbour then directly out to sea moving in a south-easterly
direction along the coast to Te Ruapurapura….including the Whangaroa Harbour, its
rivers, estuaries and islands within the boundaries previously described. This includes
all waahi tapu and other areas sacred to ngā hapū me ngā whānau o Whangaroa.”
This area includes over twelve public conservation estates that are, in terms of Treaty of
Waitangi negotiations and settlement processes, deemed to be returned to hapū co-
governance.iii
While this report considers the potential ngahere of Te Rohe o Whangaroa in general, which
includes public, private, and Māori owned lands, it utilises the particulars of the Wairakau-
Mangonui Forest area as a case study to illustrate and accommodate for the diversity of
cultures, land ownership, and land uses within the rohe.

6
 Planning Framework
A visual planning tool was developed to illustrate the various aspects of a plan for
Whangaroa ngahere that involves the people and diverse communities of Whangaroa.
Within the planning tool are nine aspects or areas working together towards the vision at
the highest point of the plan, which is visually emblematic of a forest tree.
Therefore, this planning tool can be used by either an individual, whānau, hapū, local
community group, or any collective of people, to plan for the different aspects of forest
restoration projects within any given time frame.

VISION

KAI- MARA-
TIAKI MATAKA

TOOLS
WHĀNAU ADMIN TECHNO-
HAPŪ
CO-ORD LOGY

TIKANGA MATAU-
RANGA

FUNDING
SOURCES

©Miro Tapui Ltd

Illustration A: Planning Tool

7
This planning tool shows three pathways working in synergy towards its vision, goals and
objectives.
The middle path connects funding sources, through an administration which coordinates the
distribution of resources to the other separate but conjoined aspects.
The left pathway depicts the social and cultural aspects of the plan stemming from tikanga
or the cultural values which guide and inform relevant whānau-hapū, which in turn support
and sustain the work of kaitiaki.
The right pathway depicts the more biological and technical aspects of ngahere restoration.
These aspects are driven by knowledge of the issues to be addressed, e.g. animal behaviour,
kauri dieback, use of tools, monitoring, topography, etc. This knowledge informs decisions
on the type and use of available tools and technology to employ, which are used according
to planned seasonal and other timed strategies, which is Maramataka.
The use of this visual planning framework enables and promotes constructive discussion in
the research process, as well as an ease in identifying and collating relevant information,
while identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

Photo 2: Looking North-East from Ohakiri through the Whangaroa Harbour heads towards
Ririwha showing the clothing of papatuānuku with ngā uri o Tane

8
 Vision
The following visions and aspirations have been captured from various groups and
individuals:

To bring Whangaroa Ngahere back to life, build

natural resilience and return what was lost, for
current and future generations, and return
cultural and ecological indicators for both
maramataka and good forest health.
(Dean Baigent-Mercer, Otangaroa)

Through tino rangatiratangā and Hapū

rangatiratanga, we must ensure the preservation
of its health and prosperity.
(Hinemoa Pourewa, Matangirau)

To preserve and enhance natural ecosystems,

including forests, wetlands, and scrublands, by
identifying, educating, organising and managing
resources.
(Whangaroa Harbour Care)
3: Fuschia procumbens, a rare and
endangered endemic species found in
Whangaroa ngahere

I want my mokopuna to experience things that our tupuna enjoyed in the past, like
Kiwi, Kukupa, and all kinds of native birds, plants, and creatures.
(Ned Pomana, Te Komanga)

We must restore our food and medicine cupboards…that also means the knowledge
that goes with those things….for medicinal and spiritual purposes.
(Deborah Hill, Matoki)

I’m a pig-hunter. I’ve been a pig-hunter all my life…..we have to reach a position
where both sides are helping each other instead of trying to knock the other side out.
(Harley MacKenzie-Barlow, Waikoura)

To hear the sound of native bird song in our ngahere again.

(Georgine Lawrence, Te Touwai)

9
 I envisage the restoration of our forests….and our rights to exercise kaitiakitanga at
the highest levels of authority. (Frances Goulton, Wainui)

Create a wildlife corridor from Whangaroa to Hokianga….to create a defendable

peninsula. (Dr. Gary Bramley, Omaunu)

Map ii: East-west corridor envisioned by Reconnecting Northland

Findings:
The people of Whangaroa are generally aware that forest health is in decline and that it
impacts the overall poor state of the environment.
As a vision can only be determined by awareness of current threats and a good memory or
understanding of how it was, or could be, then research is needed to lift the profile and
potential of Whangaroa ngahere, along with the attitudes and behaviours of its people.
In this regard, research has highlighted that pre-contact Whangaroa Māori living in the
catchment of Whangaroa harbour, based on two independent calculations, amounted to
over 9000 people, living in and from an ancient forest: that is, Whangaroa Ngahere.
It is this imagery which has inspired the 500yr, 20 generation vision associated with this
scoping report, 1 which is a biodiverse and abundant ngahere covering Whangaroa rohe,
supporting a connected, diverse, and prosperous population, which is ngā whānau-hapū o
Whangaroa.

1
Bramley, Gary, Dr., The Ecology Group, advises that a 500-year period was adopted by the Warawara
Whakaora Ngahere group as this was the average life span of a healthy forest tree, 12 June 2018

10
 Resourcing Stakeholders
The initial scoping of various funding and resourcing avenues for environmental restoration
projects shows the current criteria for public, private and Māori-owned land. The table
shown below is dynamic, with most grants normally supporting 12 month to 3 year projects.
Table One: Potential Funding Sources

Land Tenure Potential Source Scope of Activity

Public DoC: “Battle for our Birds”
Conservation Land
DoC: Community Fund –
Putea Tautiaki Hapori
General Land NRC: Biofund – ‘to step up
(Privately owned) a gear’2
DoC: Nature Heritage
Fund
Māori Land Ngā Whenua Rāhui
(Māori owned)
Mataurangā Kura Taiao
Fund
Non specific land Predator 2050 – ‘increase
ownership / tenure support for commuity led
projects’
Kiwis for Kiwi – ‘from
endangered to
everywhere’
Kiwi Coast – collaboration
between NRC, QEII
National Trust, DoC, Kiwis
for Kiwi Trust and
Reconnecting Northland.
Program for predominantly
landscape projects
Inspires and enables community-led
conservation growth through
practical, on-the-ground projects that
restore the diversifty of our natural
heritage
Biosecurity partnershps
Multi-species pest control
Protect high value ecosystems
“to facilitate the....protection of
indigenous ecosystems on Māori
owned land”.3
“to preserve, protect and promote
the use of traditional Māori
knowledge & practices in biodiversity
management... of indigenous
ecosystems and species”.4
Large scale collaborative predator
control projects; breakthrough
scientific research and improving
current control tools & technology
Supporting community-led & Māori-
led kiwi protection projects – tools,
research, education, guidance
To link individual projects to create
continuous trapping networks and
landscape scale operations on
Northlands East Coast

2
Northland Regional Council Long Term Plan p.8
3
www.doc.govt.nz/ngawhenuarāhui downloaded 5 June 2018
4
Ibid., viewed 3 August 2018

11
 Land Tenure Potential Source
Communicaty Pest Control
Area (CPCA) –
collaboratively resourced
& funded, which at times
includes Te Puni Kokiri
Other Government Agency Support
Ministry of Social
Development
Ministry of Education
Ministry of Corrections
Other Environmental Funding Avenues
World Wide Fund Habitat Protection Fund
NZ
Environmental Education
Action Fund
Other Grassroots Fonterra
(to be further Community Organisation
researched) Grants Scheme (COGS)
Working Together More
Fund (WTMF)
Tindall Foundation
Next Foundation
Foundation North
Scope of Activity
Community led multi-speicies pest
management program, with most
recently announced CPCA being
Upokorau Farms-Summit Forest
collaboration
Training & Support for Employment
Programs
Enviro-Schools
Habitat Heroes – adapt to
Whangaroa centric curriculum
Building/providing equipment
e.g. traps & huts
Supports hand’s on ecological
protection projects for NPF groups
Supports schools and communities
who, as part of their learning, are
taking hands-on action to address an
environmental issues

Avenues to be further investigated include Philanthropy, Ethical Business or Corporate

Sponsorship, and Social Enterprises including Cooperatives.

Findings:
Government funding sources generally last for a 3-5 year period, after that projects must find
alternative, and more autonomous funding sources.
Puketi Forest Trust provides an example of a project that has addressed the issue of long term
funding. Puketi Forest Trust both governs and manages the forest restoration project
operating since 2003 and was modelled after the Pukaha Mt Bruce Restoration Project which
began in 2001. They started with a pyramid funding model where a third of funding was from
corporate soucres, a third from DoC’s Community Conservation partnership Fund, and a third
from Foundation NZ. In 2009, to compensate for those dwindling funding sources, they

12
established a capital fund and sought donations, bequeathements, etc. with a goal of reaching
$1,000,000, the interest from which will fund their entire project.
Another example of multi-faceted funding is found in the Warawara Whakaora Ake Project,
organised and managed by a representative Komiti Kaitiaki, and authorised by the Post
Settlement Governance Entity, Te Rarawa Angā Mua, which is owned by Te Rarawa Runanga.
Therefore, with this type of structure and its associated scales of economy, a long term project
of this nature is able to draw alternative funding from various sources with some resilience
to a changing political environment.
Bay Bush Action Trust are a registered charity operating in the Opua State Forest since 2011.
While they have had support from both DoC and NRC initially, however, currently their
funding comes from either corporate contribution e.g. NZ Wood, Focus paihia, BOI ITM, and
Kinghan & Associates Ltd (Accountants), or from ethical business contributions from the
profits of locally produced honey.
From these few examples we can deduce that depending on the structure under which people
are organised to conduct a particular forest restoration project, and their motivations to be
involved, will in large part determine the various opportunities available for long term
funding.

Map iii: Current and proposed Stoat trap lines in Puketi Forest Restoration, a project
that receives multi-facted funding and is achieving sustainability through Captital Fund investments

13
 Administration and Coordination
This integral aspect of the planning framework provides a forum that enables collective
decision making, and also the delegation for management of those decisions.
Therefore, this structure must enable and maintain trust and transparency, accountability,
perpetuity, and the inclusive participation of all the various people and communities of
Whangaroa. This would not be a dominating authority, but a body coordinating the policies
made by ngā whānau-hapū o Whangaroa.
It will also need to have clear and transparent processes for the distribution and
management of resources.
An analysis of a number of existing organisations in Whangaroa, who support
environmentally focussed Kaupapa, for the entire Whangaroa region, its agahere and its
people was conducted independently by Miro Tapui Ltd.
By using this analysis, we can identify the potential of each organisation to umbrella such an
Administration and Coordination body.
The details of this independent analysis, along with profiles of each organisation, is at Annex
B.
Findings:
Existing organisations in Whangaroa who provide and/or support environmentally related
programs and services for the Whangaroa region, include (in chronological order of
establishment):

• Whangaroa Māori Executive;

• Whangaroa Māori Trust Board;
• Whangaroa Community Trust;
• Te Runanga o Whaingaroa;
• Whangaroa Papa Hapū;
• Wai Care Environmental Consultants Whangaroa; and
• Kahukuraariki Trust5.
The analysis utilised for this report, indicates that there is no current organisation that fits
the criteria for an inclusive, collaborative administration and coordinating body for ngā
whānau-hapū o Whangaroa.

5
Whilst this Trust does not purport to provide services for the entire Whangaroa region, it has been included
due to relevance to the particular case study of Whangaroa-Manganui forest area.

14
 Social & Cultural Aspects
Tikanga
Why is this important?
The aspect of Tikanga, or Cultural practices, is relevant to the long term and enduring
success of a culturally appropriate forest restoration project. Similar to the aspect of
Matauranga, or Knowledge, which informs the employment of tools and technology; like-
wise Tikanga informs and sustains the values, attitudes and behaviours of people.
In this way the development of cultural values in the minds of whānau-hapū, and kaitiaki in
general, will enable the continuity of a long-term project from generation to generation.
Within Whangaroa there are a number of place names which tell a story inspired by a
connected and enduring kaitiaki culture. For instance, there is the tohungā Taawhaki whose
destiny was to climb to the heavens to retrieve the knowledge that would put his broken
family back together. These, and many more, are based in Whangaroa, and have the ability
to lift people from despair, and get on with their sacred duties to the environment.
With respect to the Wairakau-Mangonui Forest area, there are names such as Aka-ta-rere
(Akatere), Karioi, Pekapeka Bay, Moehau, and Te Urenui o Maui which hold significance in
the cultural landscape and taongā species of Whangaroa. It is expected that the cultural
redress associated with the Waitangi Tribunal process will help adjust and promote these
aspects in the public mind, including the acknowledgement of relevant waahi tapu, pa,
urupā, and other sites of occupation and/or burial places.
Also, within the aspect of Tikanga/Cultural Values is the concept of Health and Safety, which
includes both physical, mental/emotional, and spiritual wellbeing. This ensures that all
involved in the kaupapa are safe, and their mana and integrity are looked after as taongā in
their own right. This, again, ensures the longevity of the project and subsequent plan.
Finding:
This Scoping identifies that there is a gap in the understanding and application of cultural
values and practicies, and this needs to be addressed and included in the development of a
sustainable long term plan.

4. Pekapeka Bay

15
 Whānau - Hapū
In any given area of Whangaroa there are a range of whānau, hapū and community groups
with interests in protecting and caring for their ngahere, and te taiao generally. For the
purposes of this scoping report the term Whānau-Hapū is used to distinguish the range of
different whānau and hapū, including but not limited to, tangata whenua, mana whenua, local
household communities, action groups, and stakeholders. Thus, the term ngā whānau-hapū
o Whangaroa distinguishes the overall and inclusive collective.
In this way, a kaitiaki culture can develop throughout the collective Whangaroa area where:
“Kei konā koutou, māu a konā e tiaki mō tātou;
kei konei mātou, waiho ma mātou konei e tiaki mo tàtou.”iv

“You look after that place for us; and we’ll look after this place for us”

For example, in regard to Wairakau-Mangonui ngahere, evidence has been recorded of

several Whangaroa hapū with shared interests, through historical occupation and waahi tapu,
as well as seasonal hunting, gardening and gathering practices. Of these, two are currently
regarded as having mana whenua, these being Ngāti Rua and Kaitangata.
Finding:
That the Waitangi Tribunal process has identified that redress needs to be enacted through
hapū structures which are not necessarily represented by the exclusivity of systems set up
under previous and recent legislation.
Discussions with kaitiaki groups has also identified that various organisations have found it
difficult to engage with mana whenua and tangata whenua to invite and encourage
participation, and shared learning experiences.

5. Whānau from the Taupo Bay Land and Coastal care

undertaking trapping workshops (left) and preparing for Kiwi return to area (right), 2017

16
 Kaitiaki
Restoring and maintaining mauri is the object of kaitiaki; threats to it are their subjects.
The groups listed are included in the concept of Whānau-Hapū in Whangaroa, and they are
all involved in kaitiaki kaupapa and have identified Kaitiaki roles such as:
- Contributors to Policy
- Operation Management
- Pest Control and Biosecurity
- Education (e.g. Enviro Schools, papa Taiao)
- Support agency
Ongoing and inservice training, evaluation, and quality control around the work that kaitiaki
are involved in, must be accounted in the management of a long term plan.
Findings:
From an analysis of the meaning of kaitiaki, and research into what this means for
Whangaroa, we find that Kaitiaki come in different forms, for example:
- Creature kaitiaki, e.g. Kawau, Kukupa, Whai, Mango, Ngarara
- Whakatauki - proverbial sayings of tupuna
- Couples supporting each other in the kaupapa
- Youth, and young people
- Kaumatua, kuia
- Environmental warriors
- Pest controllers and eradicators
- Monitors
- Advocacy and speaking out
In regards to Kaitiaki who will be involved in Whangaroa ngahere restoration projects, there
is a need for an understanding of the various biosecurity threats, such as Kauri Dieback, and
an adherence to strict mitigating protocols. Both training and monitoring of these issues will
need to be ongoing, and mitigation plans and protocols maintained and developed.
Kaitiaki seccession is an issue for the long term, and strategies for knowledge transition and
intergenerational inclusion must be considered. For instance, involving rangatahi in ground
operations alongside experienced kaitiaki personnel, where energy and knowledge can
benefit each other.
In keeping with the overarching theme that tangata whenua and local communities are
actively responsible for their own area, it necessarily follows that the work of kaitiaki should
be done, in the first instance, by respective mana whenua, tangata whenua and local
community groups.

17
 6. Kaitiaki Rewi Bowman and Ned Pomana take a break at Te Komangā camp
while clearing and setting up trap lines on Kowhairoa, June 2018

7. Kaitiaki tutor, Robert Rush, supervises students from a barge in Pekapeka bay, as they kayak
to Te Komangā camp for environmental management studies, June 2018

8. Kaitiaki students from Whagnaroa partcipating in workshops at Kerikeri Plant and Food Research Centre
to upskill their knowledge within the papa Taiao program

18
 Biological and Technical Aspects
This section gives attention to the aspects of ngahere restoration that are more particularly
biological and technical. Making decisions about pest eradication, or any other aspect of
forest restoration work, comes from knowledge of what the actual issues are, applying that
knowledge to a choice of available tools and technology, and carrying out planned
operations in a coordinated and timely manner.

Matauranga

In the case of Whangaroa Ngahere generally, and Wairakau-Mangonui Forest in particular,

the immediate issues are:
- Loss of habitat
- Threatened and endangered endemic species
- Multiple pest and pathogen threats
- Climate change (e.g. drought), and solutions to drawing back down carbon
emissions
Because of the long-term nature of these issues, and the need to do something to make a
start, information, response, and monitoring must be specific, measurable, achievable,
relevant, and time framed.
Knowledge is required of understanding the native and endemic species that make and
enhance ngahere biodiversity, as well as understanding the pests and pathogens that
endanger and threaten them. In the case of Whangaroa Ngahere generally, and Wairakau-
Mangonui Forest in particular, there are many unique iconic and endemic species either
now extinct, endangered, or under threat. What do we know about them, and what can we
do?
Findings:
- Although there is access to information, it is often disregarded or confused because
of public distrust of officialdom and authority.
- Due to Government funding cuts, monitoring of Whangaroa ngahere has been
limited, making a stocktake measure difficult.
- Local general knowledge of the issues is confused by conflicting evidence, and
distracted by side issues such as the aerial use of 1080 toxin.

19
 Tools and Technology
The range of issues, together with their particulars, determine the type of “tool kit” required.
After being outfitted with personal equipment, including boots for Kauri Dieback mitigation,
there are mapping and orientation tools, and track cutting tools, before thinking about traps,
toxins, and other technology available for a pest eradication and forest restoration program.
There are a range of both kill, and hold traps on the market, and often it comes down to
personal preference as to what different trappers use, however there are policies regarding
their use under the Animal Welfare Act. Ultimately, there are traps for pigs, possums,
mustelids, rats, mice, and feral cats.
With regard to toxins there is also a range to consider and choose from, some are regulated
and need a Controlled Substance License to use, e.g. Cyanide, Cholecalciferol, Brodifacoum,
some are not, e.g. 5% strength Pindone, Pest Off.
Findings:
For the purposes of this scoping report, it suffices to advise that this aspect determining
preferred tools and technology, deserves in-depth investigation, and collaborative decision
making.
The NRC website provides information on the range of tools and technical advice is
accessible online at: https://www.nrc.govt.nz/environment/weed-and-pest-control/pest-
control-hub/?classification=0&orderby=Views
Northland Regional Council administer, license, and regulate the use of toxins and controlled
substances, under the Health and Safety at Work Regulations 2017.

9. Whānau at Karangahape Marae following trapping workshop

facilitated by NRC Biosecurity Officer, Michael Knight (far left), February 2018.

20
 Maramataka
Maramataka is the calendar, almanac, and timing frequency of daily, monthly, and seasonal
activities. While it helps determine the time to plan for an activity or event, it also helps
govern those times when certain places and activities are regulated. This is the fundamental
concept of rāhui.
With a wise use of time management strategies, projects have their greatest effect, and all
resources, natural and otherwise, can be managed sustainably.
By factoring the principles of Maramataka into project planning enables a measurable
process aligned to the daily, monthly, and seasonal behaviours of the species in focus.
Monitoring and recording those activities and their effects informs development of the
ongoing project.
For the purposes of this scoping exercise we have envisaged the 500 year average life span
of a forest tree, which corresponds to 20 x 25 year human generations.
Findings:
- Ngati Rua plan to lay a rāhui on their Kauri forests, including Wairakau-Mangonui
forest, by the end of August 2018 to mitigate the spread of Kauri Dieback.
- An aerial 1080 operation that had been planned to coincide with the beginning of
spring 2018 has been postponed.
- A cholecalciferol ground operation during spring 2018, to provide relief to ngahere
on Kowhairoa Historic Reserve is planned in consultation with mana whenua
Kaitangata.
- There have been discussions with NRC to plan for a cull of pigs around and in the
Wairakau-Mangonui forest.
- MPI scientists are being hosted by Te Tau Ihu o Te Pō Trust to conduct a survey of
Kauri Dieback in late spring 2018 when ground is drier.

10. Taken in 2005 and 2011, these show a coastal pohutukawa revived following trapping programs
facilitated by Mahinepua-Radar Hill Land Care

21
 Summary of Findings
Generally, the aspects associated with the biological and technical side of the plan and its
framework, i.e. knowledge of the issues, available tools and technology, and Maramataka
strategies, are well understood and/or are relatively easy to access. For instance, there is a
large and developing body of knowledge around biosecurity issues, both in terms of
Western science and Mataurangā Māori.
Also, there is a large range of tools and technology to choose from and easy access to
training in their use, with developed ideas around seasonal and other timing strategies to
use to get best results.
Overall, there is a lot of research and investment locally, regionally, and nationally going
into these aspects.
However, the aspects associated with the social and cultural side of the plan and its
framework, i.e. Tikanga, Whānau-hapū, resourcing kaitiaki, and also an appropriately
represented decision-making administration, are where the greatest weaknesses and
threats lie. For instance, by the disruptions of colonisation, individualism, and centralised
top down governance, these aspects have been largely ignored and neglected leaving
misunderstanding and disconnected people in their place.
These are the areas which therefore need the most attention in planning and development
in order that indigenous people and local communities are empowered in a culture of
kaitiakitanga to engage in forest restoration.
Also, the nature and development of a coordinating administration aligned to the needs
peculiar to ngā whānau-hapū o Whangaroa, especially in the long term, provides some real
challenges. Current economic forces have left a separated people disempowered and
believing that the “experts” and “authorities” will take care of it. Hence, the reasoning
behind the different aspects of this plan.

22
Recommendations:
1. That research be undertaken on Whangaroa ngahere taongā species to develop
specific strategies to restore, enhance, and protect each.

2. That a bottom-up organisational structure that enables whānau-hapū, local

community groups, and stakeholders to collaborate, make collective policies, and
delegate management of those policies, is developed for ngā whānau-hapū o
Whangaroa, and that:
• it is an inclusive social model that defines facilitates bringing together
of people to develop and disseminate collaborative knowledge, in this
way navigating and guiding their respective whānau-hapū and/or
sphere of influence,6
• its constitution derives from regular congress of represented ngā
whānau-hapū where shared interests and concerns are discussed, and
collective resolutions and policies made,
• the coordinating and communication body is a representative
committee (e.g. Komiti Kaitiaki), authorised and resourced equitably
by the collective of ngā whānau-hapū to manage resolutions. In this
way it does not become a dominating or monopolising entity over
autonomous whānau-hapū o Whangaroa,
• the flow of information is administered, through identified portfolios,
which become the responsibility of an administration whose function
also legitimates an accountable channel for funding sources,
• the administration supports, and does not dominate, an autonomous
collective of ngā whānau-hapū.

ADMINISTRATION

NGĀ WHĀNAU-HAPŪ MEET AS CONGRESS TO DISCUSS ISSUES,

FORM RESOLUTIONS & DEVELOP POLICIES

WHĀNAU WHĀNAU WHĀNAU WHĀNAU

HAPŪ HAPŪ HAPŪ HAPŪ

6
Explanation of the term ‘rangatira’ provided by Roopu Kaumatua o Whangaroa Papa Hapū (June 2018)

23
3. That a financial business plan be developed, alongside the strategic plan, that takes
in to account the long-term funding sustainability such as corporate sponsorship,
ethical business relationships, social enterprises, and capital funds.

4. That the aspect of tikanga or cultural values (the long-term driving force of forest
restoration) must be developed and coordinated by ngā whānau-hapū o Whangaroa.

5. That the long-term plan must incorporate ongoing education, training, and
evaluation, as well as succession planning through the involvement of tamariki and
rangatahi.

6. That the long-term plan must incorporate ongoing wananga to educate ngā whānau-
hapū in all aspects of environmental restoration and maintenance. For instance,
raising awareness of issues, effects of available tools and technology (e.g. toxins),
animal behaviour, etc.

7. That the following timeframes be considered as a basis for any of the participating
plans that are developed by ngā whanau-hapū o Whangaroa, as part of the
collaborative long-term plan:

Stage One: Provide relief. Six-month plan to establish and maintain initial
traplines for possum, rat, stoat, and feral cat on perimeter and
circuit networks. Monitor and record results.

Stage Two: Establish support. Build on and intensify systems including an

emphasis on securing available food sources. Monitor, record,
and develop information data bases. Wananga.

Stage Three: Multi technical targeting to aid the prosperity of taonga species.
Monitor, record, wananga.

Stage Four: Establish long term systems and processes. Education, funding
diversity, organisational structure, succession, tikanga
integration, vision development.

Note: All ground work will be done with regard to Kauri dieback, and the need to
restrict public access.

24
 Annex A: Project Narrative
Literature Review
This involved a review of information on both government and non-government agencies
with particular focus on policies which protect the forest and its environment, including:

• National authorities and organisations e.g. Department of Conservation, New

Zealand Forest & Bird, Ngā Whenua Rāhui
• Local government plans e.g. Northland Regional Council, Far North District Council
• Whangaroa Māori organisations e.g. Te Runanga o Whaingaroa Inc., Kahukuraariki
Trust
In addition we reviewed a number of Forest Plans and Reports, with a particular interest in
decision making models and management strategies. These include:

• Pukaha-Mt Bruce Restoration Report 2001 – 2014

• Russell State Forest Roopu Mangai & 20 Year Ngahere Health Plan Presentation (Feb
2018)
• Warawara Whakaora Ake Project Management Plan 2017 – 2517
• Whirinaki War on Weeds and Predator Free Project management Plan 2018 – 2038
Community Engagement
This involved interviews and discussions with a range of local and regional groups and/or
their representatives, with a focus on current activities and plans of action, including:

• Basically Bush
• Bay Bush Action
• Department of Conservation
• Kiwi Coast
• Mahinepua Land Care
• Ngati Miro Environmental Education and Enhancement Trust
• Ngā Whenua Rāhui
• Northland Regional Council
• Otangaroa Land Care
• Puketi Forest Trust
• Reconnecting Northland
• Summit-Upokorau Ecological Project
• Tai Tokerau Climate Change Group
• Tau Iho i Te Pō Trust
• Taupo Bay Land and Coastal Care
• Te Komangā Marae Trust
• Te Ukaipo
• Totara North Ratepayers and Residents Assocation
• Upokorau Farms-Whitehills Forest CPCA
• Whangaroa Community Development Group

25
 • Whangaroa Harbour Care
• Whangaroa Predator Free
A Whangaroa Ngahere Planning Hui was also held at Karangahape Marae, Matangirau to
which 16 people attended sharing their views on kaitiakitanga.
In addition, we have informally discussed the project and its goals with several members of
the local whānau-hapū and community members who have shared their visions and ideas to
assist in the development of an overall long term forest health plan.

26
 Annex B
Independent Analysis on Existing Whangaroa Structures

Organisational Profiles
Whangaroa Māori Executive
The Whangaroa Māori Executive was established under the Social and Economic
Advancement Act 1945, which was amended to become the Māori Community
Development Act 1962. As such, they have a mandate to address the socio-cultural issues of
Whangaroa Māori through the work of Whangaroa Tribal Committees, of which there were
seven initially gazetted. This analysis has identified two of the initial seven, as being
currently active.

Whangaroa Māori Trust Board

The Whangaroa Māori Trust Board was established in 1986 to provide for educational
schemes and opportunities, promote the retention of Māori ancestral land and traditions,
and assist in the development and maintenance of Whangaroa Marae.

Whangaroa Community Trust

The Whangaroa Community Trust was established in the 1980s as a charitable trust able to
apply for and administer funds for community led projects. One of these is the Whangaroa
Community Development Group (WCDG), set up in 2009 under the umbrella of FNDC.

Te Runanga o Whaingaroa
Te Runanga O Whaingaroa was established under the Runanga Iwi Act 1989 and are
regarded as the Iwi Authority who have the Mandate for Ngāpuhi ki Whangaroa/Ngati Kahu
ki Whaingaroa for the purposes of the Māori Fisheries Act 2004 and Māori Commercial
Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004. Te Runanga o Whaingaroa is governed by a Board
of Trustees who are delegates elected from affiliated marae, and who are in turn, governed
by their marae committees. There are 17 marae in Whangaroa, however only 11 are
currently represented on the Runanga Board.
Te U Kai Po
In 2011 TROW established Te U Kai Po to address environmental interests through
participation in government policy making, and resource consent application process. Since
that time Te U Kai Po have initiated two Iwi Management Plans – the first in 2011 which was
not ratified; followed by a 2016-2021 Strategy was continues to be a ‘work in progress’.

27
Whangaroa Papa Hapū
The Whangaroa Papa Hapū was established as a Committee in Common in 2003, through
claimant funding provided by Crown Forestry Rental Trust. Their purpose is to facilitate and
support research, and assist the preparation of evidence in the prosecution of Whangaroa
Claims under the Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act 1985. Of those claims, there is a strong
voice recommending redress in terms of both environmental and social issues, and to be
supported as recognised kaitiaki. Due to the near-completion of the hearings stage of this
Waitangi Tribunal process, the Whangaroa Papa Hapū are currently revising their
Constitution and purpose. Research conducted identifies over 42 Whangaroa hapū.

Wai Care Environmental Consultancy Whangaroa

Wai Care Environmental Consultancy Whangaroa was established as a Charitable Trust in
2007 to provide key information to Councils, Resource Consent Applicants and
Environmental Consultants, to enhance their understanding of current tikanga practices.
Among its purposes is to engage with Whangaroa Iwi/Hapū/Marae to assist and guide the
development of Management Plans and Resource Management Units. It is understood that
Wai Care Environmental Consultancy also manages the drinking water supply for the Kaeo
Township.

Kahukuraariki Trust
Kahukuraariki Trust are the Post Settlement Governance Entity (PSGE) established in 2015,
to manage the Assets received from the Ngātikahu ki Whangaroa Settlement. These assets
are to be used to promote the educational, spiritual, economic, social and cultural
advancement or well-being, and the provision of on-going maintenance of places of cultural
or spiritual significance with interests in Whangaroa.
With regard to the Wairakau-Mangonui Forest, and recently introduced Settlement
Legislations, it more correctly falls into the jurisdiction of Kahukuraariki Trust. However this
is complicated by, as yet unsettled claims from Whangaroa Hapū and their shared interests.

28
 Miro Tapui Analysis on Potential for Administration & Coordination Umbrella Organisation
Existing Organisation Strength
Whangaroa Māori Knowledge of Whakaminengā
Executive collaborative processes;
Works through Tribal
Committees
Whangaroa Māori Knowledge of Whakaminengā
Trust Board collaborative process
Whangaroa Independent entity formed to
Community Trust support whole community
Te Runanga o Recognised by Crown as Iwi
Whaingaroa Authority for Fisheries related
activities
Wai Care Fundamental focus on
Environmental Environmental Issues
Consultancy
Whangaroa
Kahukuraariki Trust A PSGE managing Ngati Kahu
ki Whangaroa settlement
assets
Whangaroa Papa Established process for
Hapū collaborative research;
Archival repository to support
policy development
Weakness
Only 2 of 7 Tribal Committee
remain active;
Not formed to address
environmental issues
Not formed to fundamentally
address environmental issues
Focus on economic activities;
No recognition of Treaty of
Waitangi
Operates as Corporate Body;
Focus on social service
delivery through short-term
funding contracts
Concerns as local Town
Drinking Water supplier
Not all Whangaroa estates are
within Ngati Kahu ki
Whangaroa rohe
Focus on Whangaroa
participation in Waitangi
Tribunal process;
Funded by CFRT
29
Opportunity
Tribal Committee areas could
form bio-regional bases
Formed to develop
educational opportunities,
protect ancestral lands
Accountability to Community
Umbrellas Te Ukaipo who
participates in Government
decision making & Resource
Consent Applications affecting
environment
Formed to assist Iwi, Hapū
and Marae in developing
management plans &
resource units
Short PSGE history provides
examples for wider
Whangaroa
Progressive research in
historical and environmental
issues; Connected to Hapū
Threat
Not conducive to resources
benefitting the Ngahere;
Community recognition
confused with Māori Trust
Board
Community recognition
confused with Māori
Executive
Representation dependent on
involved Community
Viewed as a Government
Agency;
Board Representation
through Marae is not inclusive
Transparency and consistency
in delivery of services and
assistance
Exclusive of ngā whānau-
hapū; Lack of clarity around
Ngati Kahi ki Whangaroa
affiliations e.g. Aukiwa
No permanent facility;
 ANNEX C
References
Plans
Department of Conservation (2014). Northland Conservation Management Strategy 2014-
2024, pp.56-60, Volume 1, Operative 29 September 2014.
Northland Regional Council (2015). Long Term Plan 2015-2025. Putting Northland First.
Downloaded 4.6.2018.
Northland Regional Council (2017). Northland Regional Pest and Marine pathway
Management Plan 2017-2017.
Pukaha-Mt Bruce Restoration Report 2001 – 2014. Prepared by Dr. Helen Blacklie.
Russell State Forest Roopu Mangai & 20-Year Forest Health Plan Presentation (Feb 2018)
The Ecology Company and Te Rarawa Angā Mua (2017). Warawara Whakaora Ake Project
Management Plan 2017-2517.
The Ecology Company and Whirinaki Toiora Trust (2018). Whirinaki War on Weeds and
Predator Free Project Management Plan 2018 – 2038.

Publications
Conning, L. (1999). Natural areas of Whangaroa Ecological District. Reconnaissance Survey
Report for the Preotected Natural Areas Programme. Department of Conservation,
Northland Conservancy, Whangarei.
De Lange, Peter J., Rolfe, Jeremy R., Barkla, John W., Courtney, Shannel P., Champion, paul
D., Perrie, Leon R., Beadel, Sarah M., Ford, Kerry A., Breitwieser, Ilse, Schōnberger, Ines,
Hindmarsh-Walls, Rowan, Heenan, Peter B. and Ladley, Kate (2017) Conservation status of
New Zealand indigenous vascular plants. Department of Conservation Te papa Atawhai.
New Zealand Threat Classification Series 22.
Paikea (1998), Information Manual: The Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand,
established 1835.
Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Te Kaitaikai Taiao a Te Whare paremata
(2011). Evaluating the use of 1080: Predators, poisons and silent forests

Reports
He Whakaputangā me te Tiriti, The Declaration and the Treaty, Waitangi Tribunal Report,
2014.

30
Kia matau, kia mohio e ora ana Te U Kai Po (June 2011). A report prepared by Te Ukaipo for
Ngā Hapū o Whangaroa. Downloaded 3.3.2018
Northland Regional Council (2015) State of the Environment Report. Downloaded 4.6.2018
Ship rat, stoat, and possum control on mainland New Zealand. An overview of techniquies,
successes and challenges (2015). Department of Conservation, Brown, K., Elliot, G., Innes, J.
and Kemp, J.
Whangaroa Oral and Traditional History Report, 2011, prepared by Te Uira Associates

Unpublished Documents
Far North District Council Te Kaunihera o Tai Tokerau ki te Raki (2018). Creating Great
Places. He Ara Tāmata. Consultation Document for our Long Term Plan 2018-2028.
Northland Regional Council (2018) Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document.
Te Runanga o Whaingaroa (2005). Trust Deed.
Te Runanga o Whaingaroa (2017). Trust Deed (Revised Draft)
Te Runanga o Whaingaroa (2016) Te Runanga o Whaingaroa Environment Management
Plan (Draft). 2016-2021

i
This whakatauki is of Ngāti Rua origin, shared by Moana Wood, and refers to the deeds of Maui undertaken in
Whangaroa. In this translation it signifies the emergence of Whangaroa
ii
In this system the land is covered by Whānau-hapū, or family community groups, who are responsible
through tino rangatiratanga, for their respective areas. As it is Hapū who have been here, and will remain here
in the long term, when other families or groups settle in that area they do so by tuku [to the] whenua, and
remain by ahi kaa as part of that Hapū. Therefore the land is covered collectively by ngā whānau-hapū o
Whangaroa accounting inclusively for all the people across the land, and describing their important duties to
each other and their responsibility for te taiao, or the environment.
iii
This assumption is based on the findings of the Waitangi Tribunal and the understanding that hapū rangatira
entered into a sacred agreement with the Crown, that being Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and therefore effective
redress shall be with hapū. This was confirmed by the Minister for Treaty Negotiations, Hon. Minister Andrew
Little, at public hui held in Tai Tokerau between 10 – 12 August 2018.
iv
This whakatauki acknowledges the whānaungatanga/relationships between hapū of Whangaroa and
surrounding areas, as well as their respective responsibility to care for the environment for the benefit of all.
Recorded by Te Taumata o Tangitū roopu kaumātua in the 1990s it has been adopted by the Whangaroa papa
Hapū

31