BEFORE THE SOUTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL. IN THE MATTER of a proposed plan under Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991 AND

Transcription

1 BEFORE THE SOUTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL IN THE MATTER of a proposed plan under Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER of a submission by NGĀI TAHU on the PROPOSED SOUTHLAND WATER AND LAND PLAN STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF GAIL TEWARU TIPA ON BEHALF OF NGĀ RŪNANGA (WAIHOPAI RŪNAKA, TE RŪNANGA O AWARUA, TE RŪNANGA O ŌRAKA APARIMA, AND HOKONUI RŪNAKA) AND TE RŪNANGA O NGĀI TAHU 26 MAY 2017 Barristers & Solicitors J G A Winchester / S J Scott Telephone: Facsimile: james.winchester@simpsongrierson.com PO Box 2402 SOLICITORS WELLINGTON 6140

2 . TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION SCOPE OF EVIDENCE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE MINISTRY FOR ENVIRONMENT S ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR PROGRAMME IDENTIFICATION OF CULTURAL INDICATORS OF HEALTH RESPONSIVENESS OF CULTURAL HEALTH INDICATORS TO MĀORI VALUES RESEARCH THAT I HAVE NOT COVERED IN MY EVIDENCE EXAMPLES SHOWING HOW WE HAVE USED CULTURAL INDICATORS CONCLUSION Appendix 1 - Takiroa (Lower Waitaki) Appendix 2 - Willowburn (at Ahuriri Nohoanga) Appendix 3 - Irwell River at Lake Rd References

3 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 My name is Gail Tewaru Tipa. 1.2 I whakapapa to a number of the marae in the Ngāi Tahu rohe. My father s whanau was originally from Tuahiwi before they moved down to Moeraki. My mother (who was non-māori) is part of the Colquhoun and Tuft families who farmed on the Lower Taieri. 1.3 I am actively engaged in the affairs of Te Rūnanga o Moeraki. I have represented the interests of Moeraki in many resource management forums for the last twenty years. 1.4 I graduated from the University of Otago with a Bachelor of Arts (majoring in Geography), a Master of Regional and Resource Planning, and a Doctor of Philosophy (in Geography). I am the director and shareholder of Tipa and Associates Limited. We contract social science services to Crown Research Institutes. For example, my experience includes: (a) developing a Cultural Health Index which is a method Maori can apply to assess stream health, including whether a stream supported cultural use, which has been adapted for use in the Murray Darling Basin; (b) developing a process for undertaking Cultural Flow Assessments. This is a method to help whanau identify flows they want to see provided in rivers. It includes a consideration of the impact of flows on mahinga kai. This has been applied in more than 40 rivers and streams across New Zealand; (c) developing values-based report cards an approach that enables agencies report against a range of indicators that relate to the attributes of taonga / practices / beliefs that whanau value; (d) restoration of aquatic systems, usually involving the restoration of mahinga kai; (e) linking matauranga Maori with ecotoxicology enabling scientists to test sites whanau gather from, and the species whanau gather. Understanding this information, along with data about how much is eaten by whanau and how often, enables food safety limits to be investigated. Studies have been 1

4 (f) (g) completed for the Rotorua lakes, Te Waihora, and the streams of South Canterbury; developing a cultural component to a DSS for urban waterways that is intended to help decision-makers plan the expansion of a city taking account of waterways and estuarine areas; and our latest project is examining how to utilise both matauranga Maori and western science to enable more effective participation of Maori in scenario planning processes (such as limit setting). Our focus to date has been the processes employed by Environment Canterbury. 1.5 My company and I also continue to work in resource management: (a) (b) (c) preparing applications for resource consent (usually subdivision consents); impact assessments; advising Councils in limit-setting processes. 1.6 For my rūnanga (Te Rūnanga o Moeraki) my work mainly consists of: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) responding to applications for resource consent (subdivision); participating in plan change processes (both district and regional); establishing and maintaining relationships with resource users in our catchment; helping to implement rūnanga based projects; and representing the rūnanga on different komiti and forums. 1.7 I am an independent Director on the Bioprotection Centre, which is a national Centre of Research Excellence funded since 2003 by the Tertiary Education Commission. I am also on the Governance Group for the Bioheritage & Biosecurity National Science Challenge. The Challenge brings together researchers from universities and other academic institutions, Crown Research Institutes, businesses and non-government organisations. The mission of the Challenge is to: Reverse the decline of New Zealand s biological heritage, through a national partnership to deliver a step change in research innovation, globally leading technologies and community and sector action. 2

5 1.8 I am a Director of KTKO Ltd, a resource management company owned by the four papatipu rūnanga in Otago. 1.9 I have been asked by Ngā Rūnanga to prepare evidence for this hearing on the identification of indicators of cultural health. 2. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 2.1 My evidence addresses the need for cultural indicators of health, in particular why western science monitoring indicators are not considered adequate, and how Ngāi Tahu indicators of health provide a holistic view of what is happening in the environment. 2.2 I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court Practice Note 2014 and I agree to comply with it. My qualifications are set out above. I confirm that the issues addressed in this statement of evidence are within my area of expertise. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions expressed. I note that whilst I am of Ngāi Tahu descent, I am bound by the Code of Conduct and am required to be impartial and unbiased in my professional opinions expressed. 3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3.1 I describe the relationship of cultural health indicators and the Ministry for the Environment s Environmental Performance Indicator (EPI) Programme. The identification of cultural indicators by Ngāi Tahu was one of four Māori case studies were supported, to test the efficacy of Māori participation in the formulation of EPIs. 3.2 Despite observing and voicing concerns about the poor health of freshwater resources within their rohe, the ability of Ngāi Tahu to influence freshwater management has thus far been limited, as their role has been largely confined to one of advocacy. Māori have been consulted by resource management agencies as statutory plans and policies are formulated, but they have not been accorded the status of equal participants in decision-making fora. One of the outcomes sought by the project was a change in the nature of participation by Ngāi Tahu in freshwater management within the Otago region. 3

6 3.3 Although there have been three stages of the project completed, Stage 1 of the project and parts of Stage 2 are most relevant to the matters being discussed today. 3.4 Stage 1 identified a sizeable set of indicators that Ngāi Tahu use to assess the health of freshwater resources. 3.5 In Stage 2, the indicators of cultural health and mahinga kai were refined to develop a tool and a process that could be used by kaitiaki to assess the condition of freshwater resources. The indicators are grouped into three components: (a) (b) (c) site status, specifically the significance of the site to Māori; a mahinga kai measure; and a stream health measure. 3.6 The indicators that resulted from Stage 1 of the project, reflect Māori concerns for health throughout a catchment, ki uta ki tai from the mountains to the sea, and express a holistic approach to that health. All of the indicators identified represent the factors that Ngāi Tahu kaumatua and resource managers believe are conducive to a healthy river with a strong vibrant mauri The indicators also illustrate how the perspectives Māori bring to resource management differ from those of non-māori. A comparison of the indicators identified by Ngāi Tahu with western science-based indicators identified by the Ministry for Environment s Freshwater Working Group reveal the extent of these differences (Table 1). 3.8 I am confident that the cultural health indicators arising from stages 1 and 2 of the project and those included within the Cultural Health Index (CHI) are able to be replicated and assessed during fieldwork. 3.9 I am also confident that the indicators when applied as part of a robust process recognise and provide for Māori values described by other witnesses. 1 This concept is discussed more fully in the evidence of Murihiku whanau. 4

7 3.10 Finally, cultural indicators are being applied in other regions of New Zealand and internationally (for example in the Murray Darling Basin of Australia). 4. THE MINISTRY FOR ENVIRONMENT S ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR PROGRAMME 4.1 In this section, I provide a brief overview of: (a) (b) (c) the relationship of the CHI project to the Ministry for the Environment s Environmental Performance Indicator (EPI) Programme; the concerns of Māori with respect to the EPI Programme; and the concerns of Ngāi Tahu that led to the initiation of a freshwater indicators project in 1997/98. Background to the EPI Programme 4.2 The Environment 2010 strategy details a set of national environmental goals that were adopted by the Government in Goals and proposed actions for nine priority issues represent the environmental outcomes sought from the implementation of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The purpose of the EPI Programme was to develop a core set of environmental performance indicators that will allow progress towards the key goals of Environment 2010 to be tracked over time. Specifically, the Ministry contended that the EPI Programme would enable resource managers to assess: (a) (b) (c) (d) the state of the environment at national, regional and local levels; the impact of human activities on the environment; emerging trends; and the effectiveness of key legislation and policy, such as the RMA, Environment 2010, New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement, and the statutory plans and policies of regional and district councils. 4.3 The Ministry for Environment led the EPI Programme which, although now ended, resulted in indicators being developed for air, the marine 5

8 environment, freshwater, terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity, energy and transport resources. 4.4 Environmental performance indicators have the potential to be crucial to resource management, but the framework initially adopted by the Ministry threatened to reduce ecosystems to simplistic sets of natural resource components (e.g. air, freshwater, land, plants). Considerations fundamental to Māori, such as interactions within ecosystems, were not well accommodated. This represented a weakness in the overall indicators framework. Direction from Māori was needed to show how they might be directly involved in the development of EPIs. Four Māori case studies were supported, to test the efficacy of Māori participation in the formulation of EPIs, one being the Taieri Indicator Project and the development of the CHI. Background to the identification of Freshwater indicators and the development of the Cultural Health Index 4.5 The CHI project was initially developed in response to a number of concerns about freshwater management voiced by members of Ngāi Tahu whanui. Numerous catchments within the rohe of Ngāi Tahu experience both deteriorating water quality and mounting pressures on the quantity of water available to meet the needs of both in-stream and extractive uses. Ngāi Tahu contend that these issues need to be addressed by resource managers because they are adversely impacting on the cultural association of Ngāi Tahu with the affected freshwater resources Water quality remains a concern throughout the rohe. With respect to water quantity, Ngāi Tahu have argued strongly in resource management fora that cultural values have been accorded lower priority in decisions relating to the allocation of water than have extractive uses. Observable adverse impacts on cultural and spiritual values include low flows, loss of in-stream habitats, changes to estuarine areas and the related issue of salt water intrusion, unnatural dewatering of significant sites, reduced flushing and flood flows, and changes to sediment movement and deposition patterns. 2 Te Runanga o Ngāi Tahu, 1999, Freshwater Policy Statement, Kai Tahu Ki Otago, 1996, Natural Resource Management Plan. 6

9 4.7 The issue of inadequate minimum flows and excessive extractions are concerns that are shared by papatipu rūnanga within the Canterbury and Otago regions, and are in evidence in the plans and policies of the two regional councils covering these parts of the South Island 3. The Taieri River project and the identification of indicators had its origins in the minimum flow debates - when it became apparent that Ngāi Tahu would continue to struggle to have their perspective recognised by the Otago Regional Council through the existing management approach. 4.8 Despite observing and voicing concerns about the poor health of freshwater resources within their rohe, the ability of Ngāi Tahu to influence freshwater management has thus far been limited, as their role has been largely confined to one of advocacy. Māori have been consulted by resource management agencies as statutory plans and policies are formulated, but they have not been accorded the status of equal participants in decision-making fora. One of the outcomes sought by the project was a change in the nature and extent of participation by Ngāi Tahu in freshwater management within the Otago region. 4.9 Stage 1 of the project was thus narrowly defined. Its initial focus was freshwater issues in the Taieri Catchment, specifically the previous lack of attention to the incorporation of Māori values in their management. It therefore sought to address what was perceived to be a shortcoming in the Ministry s EPI programme, and the regional council s proposed approach to the monitoring of freshwater resources by determining how Māori would go about assessing the health and wellbeing of these resources should they become involved in data collection and monitoring. 5. IDENTIFICATION OF CULTURAL INDICATORS OF HEALTH 5.1 The research that was undertaken to identify cultural health indicators was part of a wider project to develop a CHI for rivers and streams. The CHI is a tool that involves whanau/hapu/iwi in resource management processes. Funded by the Ministry for Environment as part of its EPI Programme, this work arose in response to a need to recognise and incorporate Māori values in river management. In addition to this the CHI 3 The two regional councils being Environment Canterbury and Otago Regional Council. 7

10 provides a diagnostic tool which identifies issues of concern to whanau/hapu/iwi. Remedial actions can then be prioritized using data gathered from field assessments. Monitoring aspects of the freshwater resource can also be undertaken. Stage As noted in para 4.9 above, during the first stage the CHI work documented the association of Ngāi Tahu with the Taieri River catchment and identified a sizeable set of indicators that Ngāi Tahu use to assess the health of freshwater resources (Tipa 1999). These indicators were identified from a series of interviews I completed with Ngāi Tahu who were engaged in resource management activities. Nineteen interviews were completed with individuals mainly based in the southern part of the Ngāi Tahu rohe (i.e. below the Waitaki River). Stage In Stage 2 the indicators of cultural health and mahinga kai were refined to develop a tool and a process that could be used by kaitiaki to assess the condition of freshwater resources. I worked closely with Laurel Teirney during this phase of the research. This work focused on the Taieri and Kakaunui catchments (single-channel, rain-fed rivers) and involved Te Rūnanga o Moeraki and Te Rūnanga Otakou. The stream CHI was thus devised and first used in 2002 (Tipa & Teirney 2003). It has three components: (a) (b) (c) Component 1: site status, specifically the significance of the site to Māori; Component 2: a mahinga kai measure; and Component 3: a cultural stream health measure. 8

11 Stage Recognising the need to validate the CHI to determine whether the tool could be implemented more widely, a further stage was carried out. Stage 3 involved the application of the process to another river type in the rohe of Ngāi Tahu (the braided Hakatere [Ashburton] River). A major question was whether different river types might each need their own modified version of the CHI. Stage 3 also involved a river like the Taieri and Kakaunui (the Tukituki) but in the rohe of another iwi (Ngati Kahungunu). The question here was whether different iwi might incorporate different values, perhaps requiring fewer or more than the three components of the CHI, or perhaps needing to incorporate different indicators in the assessment of the third CHI component (stream health). The need for cultural indicators 5.5 From a Māori perspective, the Ministry for the Environment s approach to the development of Environmental Performance Indicators could not provide an independent, holistic measure of ecosystem health. Freshwater environmental performance indicators developed by the Ministry (in 1998) were restricted to the waterway itself and the riparian zone (see Table 1). TABLE 1: INDICATORS IDENTIFIED BY THE MINISTRY FOR ENVIRONMENT S WORKING GROUP Macro invertebrate index Temperature Riparian condition 4 Clarity Periphyton Occurrence of native fish DO (% saturation) Ammonia (mg/l) 5.6 This limited approach concerned Ngāi Tahu. It also represented an opportunity, as Ngāi Tahu were invited to suggest their own indicators of cultural health via the Taieri River Project. The indicators identified by Ngāi Tahu whanui during Stage 1 (Table 2) and the CHI (described in the next section) that resulted from Stage 2, represent the assessment of a 4 Note in Table 2 that Māori identified as two distinct indicators riparian condition (in general) and the condition of riparian areas in the headwaters. 9

12 mix of physical attributes of waterways and catchments and other values that Māori ascribe to freshwater. 5.7 The indicators listed in Table 2 confirm that Maori are concerned with health throughout a catchment, ki uta ki tai from the mountains to the sea, and as a set of indicators they reinforce the significance of holism. All of the indicators identified represent the factors that kaumatua and Ngāi Tahu resource managers believe are conducive to a healthy river, with a strong vibrant mauri. A waterbody with a healthy mauri will sustain healthy ecosystems, support cultural uses (including mahinga kai) and be a source of pride and identity to the people. TABLE 2: FREQUENCY OF INDICATORS IDENTIFIED BY KAUMATUA 5 INDICATOR FREQUENCY 1. Place names 3 2. Greasiness of water 3 3. Temperature of water 3 4. Smell 2 5. Unpleasant odours 4 6. Presence of riffles 9 7. Sound of winds in riparian vegetation 2 8. Sound of birds being present 2 9. Sound of current of waterway Sound of flood flows Flow in river visible Riparian vegetation overhang Riparian vegetation in headwaters Presence or absence of activities in the headwaters Colour Presence or absence of sediment on the riverbed Continuity of vegetation from land, through riparian zone, to the waterway Unnatural growths Foams, oils and other human pollution Flood flows Willow infestation Abundance and diversity of fish species Abundance and diversity of birdlife Presence or absence of stock in the riparian margin and waterway Changes to the river mouth Unnatural sedimentation in channels Loss of aquatic vegetation in the marine environment The health of fish found in the waterway The stomp test Changes to the extent of the tidal influence The perspective that Ngāi Tahu would bring to resource management, which is different to that of non-maori, is partly reflected in Table 3 which compares the indicators for freshwater that were identified by kaumatua 5 This table is explained in more detail in Taieri River Case Study (Tipa, October 1999). 10

13 with those "scientifically based" that were identified by the Ministry for Environment s Freshwater Working Group. TABLE 3: COMPARISON BETWEEN INDICATORS IDENTIFIED BY MÄORI & THE MINISTRY FOR STREAMS AND RIVERS 6 MAORI INDICATORS INDICATORS IDENTIFIED STATE INDICATORS BY STATE AND MAORI Place names Temperature DO (% saturation) Greasiness of water Riparian condition Ammonia (mg/l) Smell Clarity Macro invertebrate index Unpleasant odours Periphyton Presence of riffles Occurrence of native fish Sound of winds in riparian vegetation Sound of birds present Sound of current of waterway Sound of flood flows Flow in river visible Smell Presence or absence of activities in the headwaters Presence or absence of sediment on the riverbed Continuity of vegetation Unnatural growths Foams, oils and other human pollution Flood flows Willow infestation Abundance and diversity of birdlife Presence or absence of stock in the riparian margin and waterway Changes to the river mouth Unnatural sedimentation in channels Loss of aquatic vegetation in the marine environment The health of fish found in the waterway The stomp test Changes to the extent of the tidal influence 5.9 What emerges from Table 3 are indicators that are uniquely Maori, those which are used by standard (scientific) monitoring regimes, and those common to both. The Ministry s indicators, as listed in Table 1, reinforce the concern of Maori that the Ministry s EPI programme was originally based on the assumption that the overall health of freshwater resources can be measured by the individual components of health (Davis, pers com) Cultural indicators provide Ngāi Tahu with the opportunity to highlight fundamental differences between a Māori and non-māori perspective. 6 This table has been adapted from a table that appears in the Taieri River Case Study (Tipa, October 1999). 11

14 One example to highlight the different perspectives was the definition of water pollution. Māori spiritual values with respect to water include perceptions of pollution that conflict with scientific measures. For example drinkable water may be scientifically defined as carrying contaminants, but at a level that is not toxic to humans. In other words a certain levels of degradation can occur. In contrast, Ngāi Tahu would require drinking water to be protected from spiritual pollution, which prohibits certain discharge activities, regardless of the level of physical contamination (Ministry for Environment 1997) While Stage 1 of the EPI project required Ngāi Tahu to identify indicators of stream health, Stage 2 sought to operationalise the indicators through the development of a CHI. Discriminating between indicators 5.12 The stream CHI was thus devised and first used in 2002 (Tipa & Teirney 2003). It has three components: (a) (b) (c) Component 1: site status, specifically the significance of the site to Māori; Component 2: a mahinga kai measure; and Component 3: a stream health measure A concern that was voiced when we were developing indicators and the CHI was the inability of some of the indicators that were identified in Stage 1 to be replicated or applied by others undertaking assessments in the field. As part of Stage 2, we developed a comprehensive research design with advice from Professor Colin Townsend (Zoology Department, University of Otago) and I jointly managed the project with Laurel Teirney so that we implemented a western scientific Maori co-development model. Stage 2 included another twenty interviews with Ngāi Tahu whanau from across the rohe of Ngāi Tahu, it was agreed that some indicators would be dropped from further consideration as shown in Table Because a goal was to develop a tool that was responsive to how whanau assess a waterway, we also identified how the indicators identified by 12

15 whanau were incorporated into the components of the CHI. This is also shown in Table 4. TABLE4: DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE INDICATORS ARE ADDRESSED IN THE FINAL CHI INDICATORS FROM STAGE 1 RESPONSE Place names* Greasiness of water Temperature of water Smell Unpleasant odours Presence of riffles Sound of winds in riparian vegetation Sound of birds being present Sound of current of waterway Sound of flood flows Flow in river visible Riparian vegetation overhang Riparian vegetation in headwaters Presence or absence of activities in the headwaters Colour Presence of absence of sediment on the riverbed Continuity of vegetation from land, through riparian zone, to the waterway Unnatural growths Foams, oils and other human pollution Flood flows Willow infestation Abundance and diversity of fish species Abundance and diversity of birdlife Presence or absence of stock in the riparian margin and waterway Changes to the river mouth Unnatural sedimentation in channels This is addressed during design of the CHI study - Traditional sites with place names of significance can be chosen. The meaning of the placename represents another dataset. Dropped as difficult to replicate. Temperature is not measured as part of the CHI Dropped as difficult to replicate. Dropped as difficult to replicate. Is addressed: by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI (variety of habitats and flow conditions) Dropped as difficult to replicate. Dropped as difficult to replicate. Dropped as difficult to replicate. Dropped as difficult to replicate. Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed: by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI (riparian vegetation) by identifying any mahinga kai plant species present as part of component 2 of the CHI Is addressed: During site selection by choosing sites in the headwaters to assess by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI by identifying any mahinga kai plant species present as part of component 2 of the CHI Is addressed: During site selection by choosing sites in the headwaters to assess by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed by two of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI Is addressed by inclusion of component 2 * of the CHI Is addressed by inclusion of component 2 of the CHI Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI This is addressed during design of the CHI study - Sites at the river mouth can be chosen Is addressed by one of the eight indicators in Component 3 of the CHI This is not measured as part of the CHI Loss of aquatic vegetation in the marine environment The health of fish found in the waterway Is addressed by components 1 and 2. 13

16 The stomp test Changes to the extent of the tidal influence Dropped as difficult to replicate. This is not measured as part of the CHI however the mahinga kai species present will give an indication of whether the waters are saline, brackish, or fresh During Stage 2 we also used statistical analyses (correlations and multiple regression) to identify those cultural indicators that most closely correlate with the assessment that whanau award for overall stream health. The University of Otago provided advice on research design throughout these analyses I am confident that the cultural health indicators arising from stage 2 of the project and within the CHI are able to be replicated and assessed during fieldwork. The extra analyses that we undertook during Stage 2 give me confidence that indicators are replicable and should address the concerns of Horticulture NZ that cultural indicators are a vague or uncertain matter, that impose undue uncertainty and burdens upon farmers and applicants for consent. 6. RESPONSIVENESS OF CULTURAL HEALTH INDICATORS TO MĀORI VALUES 6.1 Throughout the research to firstly identify cultural health indicators and secondly develop an assessment tool and process - our intention was to ensure any tool was grounded in the beliefs, values and practices of Māori. Before concluding this evidence, it is necessary to reflect, firstly, upon how the indicators recognise and provide for Māori values described by other witnesses. Whakapapa 6.2 The cultural indicators draw upon matauranga Maori and recognise interactions between, and the significance of, different parts of an ecosystem (e.g. relationship between physical characteristics and the mahinga kai species present, or between individual physical characteristics of a waterbody such as water flow, water quality, catchment and riparian condition). 14

17 Mauri 6.3 The set of indicators and the three components of the CHI collectively represent a means by which Māori will measure the present health of the river in a holistic manner, thus enabling them to assess the extent to which contemporary resource management protects the mauri of the resource. Wahi tapu and wahi taonga 6.4 Sites that are assessed as part of an overall research design will be chosen by those individuals mandated as kaitiaki because the sites are significant due to their tapu or taonga status. The assessment of the state will reflect the special significance of the state. Rangatiratanga 6.5 Application of the CHI by Manawhenua and use of the data collected formally recognises the rights of iwi to land, water and other natural resources within their tribal areas - including rights to access, use and manage resources. Mahinga kai 6.6 The mahinga kai indicators and the mahinga kai measure with the CHI reflect the need to protect the diversity and abundance of species necessary for the cultural well-being of tangata whenua and safeguard the ability of tangata whenua to gather and use these resources, thus enabling the transference of cultural values and practices between generations. Taonga 6.7 The three components of the CHI collectively recognise the intrinsic and the amenity values of resources, and the fund amental management principle protection of the mauri of taonga. 15

18 Kaitiakitanga 6.8 When applying the indicators and CHI, Manawhenua will be fulfilling their intergenerational responsibilities to protect taonga for future generations. Tikanga Māori 6.9 The set of indicators and the three components of the CHI comprise indicators that Ngāi Tahu whanui have confirmed are those that are used by Māori to monitor the state of freshwater resources. 7. RESEARCH THAT I HAVE NOT COVERED IN MY EVIDENCE 7.1 In my evidence, I have only described the research that was undertaken to identify and refine the cultural indicators. I have not described in detail the methods used to develop the CHI or the structure of the CHI. The whanau of Murihiku are in the process of developing their own monitoring tools. 8. EXAMPLES SHOWING HOW WE HAVE USED CULTURAL INDICATORS 8.1 In this last section I want to present three examples of how we have used cultural indicators in other parts of the Ngai Tahu rohe. Although cultural tools are used across New Zealand, I describe how representatives of Ngā Rūnanga (who I have personally worked with) have used cultural indicators: (a) (b) (c) to help with the identification of restoration needs that led to a joint project with a local dairy farmer; to assess the heath of several waterways in a catchment to help with the identification of management needs, which form part of a non-regulatory Council plan; and to assess the health of waterways in a catchment under different river flow that led to identification of the minimum flows that whanau want to see provided in the catchment. 8.2 Appendix 1 is an assessment of a site in the Lower Waitaki that we first assessed in The site is part of a significant cultural landscape centred on the Takiroa rock art site. Subsequent to an assessment, a restoration plan has been developed, and in conjunction with the farm 16

19 owner we are restoring the wetland. behalf of our rūnanga and a landowner. This is a voluntary initiative on 8.3 I believe that this example starts to address the criticism of Horticulture NZ that cultural indicators are vague and uncertain, and impose undue uncertainty and burdens upon farmers and applicants for consent. This restoration I describe is enabled by the farmer who owns the land, by supporting the project and providing access. I believe that reference to assessing water quality and quantity based on Ngāi Tahu indicators of health should be retained in policies. 8.4 Results of our CHI assessments using cultural indicators have been requested by irrigators, resource users, forestry companies, and Councils. They were seen to be provide greater clarity and specificity by enabling site specific issues of concern to whanau to be identified and evaluated. 8.5 Appendix 2 is an assessment of a site, the Willowburn in the Ahuriri catchment, which is adjacent to a nohoanga that was awarded to Ngāi Tahu as part of the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement. This site is used by whanau and an eel survey has proved that the stream is well stocked with eels. The assessment confirmed that the stream is degraded yet still used by whanau. As part of the Upper Waitaki limit setting process, Environment Canterbury has confirmed that the Willowburn is to benefit from a whole of catchment restoration. This commitment is written into the Upper Waitaki Zone Implementation Plan which is a non-statutory document. 8.6 Assessment 3 is an example of an assessment we completed in the Selwyn Te Waihora catchment to identify stream flows sought by whanau. The minimum flow for the Irwell River was set at 890l/s, a significant increase from the 300l/s that was the previous minimum. This minimum flow is stated in the Land and Water Regional Plan, which is a statutory document. 8.7 The three examples that I have chosen illustrate how the data collected can inform a range of processes statutory and non-statutory. All that is needed is a commitment to collect data using cultural indicators. 9. CONCLUSION 17

20 9.1 Cultural health indicators are being applied in many regions across New Zealand. The data collected from their application is informing resource management processes. I have outlined how a structured research design was used to identify indicators of cultural health of waterways, and subsequently to discount some indicators. I concluded by providing three examples of how cultural indicators are being used by Ngāi Tahu and resource managers today. 9.2 I believe that data collected using cultural indicators introduces site and issue specificity that benefits rather than inhibits appropriate and effective resource management. Gail Tewaru Tipa 26 May

21 APPENDIX 1: TAKIROA (LOWER WAITAKI) Description Many taonga including Spring-fed channels and swamp. Modified, but good ecological values; large stands of harakeke (uncommon in valley) and purei common. Water cress and other macrophytes abundant in channels. Recent restoration planting at downstream end on southern side. Birds of note: mallard, paradise shelduck, pukeko, welcome swallow Fish (NIWA): shortfin eel, longfin eel Cultural landscape includes rock art, rock shelter, nohoanga, pa A highly significant site. Values & Opportunities sought by whanau This area is to be abundant with watercress Eels are present. There is to be no harvesting. Raupo and flax is to be present and good quality. It is valued as a pa harakeke. Restore access for cultural use Deep water channel is to be maintained. The sound of birds - unseen but heard. Populations are to be protected. Springs at the base of the terrace that feed the stream are to be protected Manage the stream and wetlands as a native fish reserve Issues perceived by whanau Good water quality is to be maintained Mix of wetland, stream, springs are to be protected. The appeal of the wetland is its proximity to Takiroa. The cultural landscape is to be protected. Better fencing is to be erected. Stock are to be excluded. The land between the wetlands and road should be retired Flows need to: o Protect connectivity 1) springs, wetlands and streams. 2) Stream to the mainstem Waitaki. o Allow restoration of the wetland / riparian vegetation / along the drainage channels. It is a working farm. Permission is required to access. Since 2000 this place has been destroyed. I am sad cos I saw it pre cows. Contamination from farming Risk of grazing within fenced area Looking upstream from the bridge below Takiroa Looking downstream from the bridge at Takiroa Site Status Cultural use Health measure A

22 APPENDIX 2: WILLOWBURN (AT AHURIRI NOHOANGA) Description The Willowburn is a tributary of the Ahuriri River located in the Upper Waitaki, flowing parallel to SH 8. Water quality is influenced by stock access to water ways. A nohoanga is located where the Willowburn joins the Ahuriri River. Values & Opportunities sought by whanau Abundant populations of long fin eels are to be present as a result of the trap and transfer programme. Healthy habitats are found throughout the catchment. Water quality is to be suitable for contact recreation i.e. able to drink without any form of treatment. Whanau are safe when staying at the nohoanga, interacting with the river, and consuming kai Stock are excluded from all waterways in the Willowburn catchment. There is to be no evidence of stock in the waterway Stream health parameters monitored by ECan are to confirm the river is in very good health. The whenua (land) is protected from any further intensification of land use. Mahinga kai Cultural materials Nohoanga Wahi taonga Taonga species Variety of taonga plant species in the catchment Bullies eels are found in this stream. Issues perceived by whanau Land use intensification Excessive sedimentation in the river. Conflict with other users e.g. anglers. Willow infestation. The stopping of the diversion of the Wairepo Creek which feeds the headwaters of the willowburn Site status Cultural use Stream health A Lower Willowburn (at the nohoanga) Links to ZIP solution package. The Ahuriri catchment is closed. There is to be no increase in contaminant load beyond what is already consented. A whole of catchment rehabilitation programme is proposed for the Willowburn. Sub regional chapter is to ensure that N/P lost from rural land use is appropriate to maintain/improve water quality within the lake Clear linkages need to be established between NDA s on consents, whether the farming practices are implementing Good Management Practices and the catchment loadings limits for the lake. ECan Monitoring The parameters monitored by ECan confirm that the stream exceeds the target for all ECan parameters. o DRP, DIN, nuisance periphyton growth, visual aesthetics, suitability for contact recreation benthic biodiversity, trout habitat and rare fish. 2

23 APPENDIX 3: IRWELL RIVER AT LAKE RD Current Golders Cultural Flow Preference l/s 1100 l/s Photo of current - Whanau observed flow of approximately 350 l/s the flow closest to the minimum. It received an overall satisfaction score of 1 and a cultural health score of 1.2. At this level none of the attributes were rated as satisfactory. When the flow was observed in January 2013 The flow was gone Photo below shows 350 l/s When flows were at 890 l/s 60% of the attributes were rated as satisfactory mainly mahinga kai attributes. If flows were at 1100 l/s 89% of attributes would be rated as satisfactory including some health & wellbeing, and cultural landscape attributes. Photo of recommended (approximately 890 l/s) 1

24 Values & Opportunities sought by whanau Mix of shallows, riffles, pools, Spring and rainfall fed Gets flows from Selwyn when floods Very deep springs in upper river (valued as waipuna) Wahi tapu at mouth Harakeke highly valued Sustains tuna (long fin, short fin) Connections to lake, to Selwyn important. Connections ki uta ki tai important as part of old trail. Specific issues at this site Dead fish (trout) observed with others gasping for air at 345 l/s Perceived threats Sediment clogging High phosphorus Passage impeded by clogging Dewatered reaches upstream of Lake Road Stagnant in parts Need for planting or fencing Smell of effluent Evidence of poor management Excess effluent levels Contamination Low DO levels Elevated phosphorus levels Suffers from low flows Sediment blocking the stream at 350 l/s Management Priorities Protection of springs in the headwaters Maintain connections ki uta ki tai Waiwhio traditional name to be promoted. Water quality needs to be enhanced. Summary matrix showing how themes scored at recommended flow Use Wai Health and wellbeing Cultural landscapes

25 Flow Duration Curve The flow duration curve is a plot that shows the percentage of time that flow in a stream is likely to equal or exceed some specified value of interest. 3

26 10. REFERENCES Ministry of Environment (1997) Environmental Performance Indicators: Proposals for Air, Freshwater and Land Ministry for the Environment, Wellington. Tipa G. (October 1999) Taieri River Case Study, Ministry for the Environment Technical Paper No. 58, Environmental performance indicators: Māori Indicators Case Study. Tipa G. Tierney L. (June 2003) A Cultural Health Index for Streams and Waterways: Indicators for recognising and expressing Māori values. Available at Tipa G. Teirney L. (November 2005a) Using the Cultural Health Index: how to assess the health of streams and waterways. Available at 1