Protecting Biodiversity and Sacred Landscapes: A Maori Case Study - - PDF document

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR INDIGENOUS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ROUNDTABLE ON THE ROLE OF AMERICAN INDIAN AND OTHER INDIGENOUS SPIRITUAL LEADERS AND HEALERS IN PROTECTING AND PRESERVING BIODIVERSITY AND SACRED LANDSCAPES 28 -30 August 2002 Lakewood, Colorado

Protecting Biodiversity and Sacred Landscapes: A Maori Case Study

Morris Te Whiti Love, Director, Waitangi Tribunal Te Atiawa, Aotearoa/New Zealand INTRODUCTION Aotearoa/New Zealand developed in a very long period of isolation after having .separated from the

• ther parts of Gondwanaland some 65 million years ago. This unique set of islands measuring some

270,500 square miles was free of terrestrial mammals -a forested raft of birds, reptiles (including dinosaurs), frogs, and invertebrates. Evolution took an unusual course developing a very high percentage of endemic species that were not found anywhere else in the world.1 Among the species that developed were the world's heaviest insect (the giant weta- punga); snails that have a life-span of up to fifty-five years (and may grow as long as a human forearm), and reptilian lizards that number more per thousand hectares than in any other temperate country. In addition New Zealand is home to the world's only flightless parrot (kakapo), and another flightless bird with nostrils at the end of its beak (the kiwi), while in its waters are found the world's smallest marine dolphin (Hector's). Tikanga or practices developed by Maori prior to colonisation were not adequate to cope with the

• nslaught of mass land clearance practice, which came with the arrival of relatively large numbers
• f Pakeha (European) in the middle of the nineteenth century in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Maori

practice was based on maintaining ecosystems largely intact to provide gathering areas of ngahere (forest) in the hinterlands with relatively small areas cleared for cultivation of crops. English pastoral farming required massive forest clearance to allow conversion to grassland pastures to allow the grazing of stock -mostly sheep and cattle. Maori hunting and gathering practices quickly became restricted to the more remote areas. The purpose on maintaining biodiversity and ecosystems for Maori was to maintain a diverse source of food (mahinga kai), medicinal material (rongoa) and textiles (taonga raranga) for all seasons of the year. Local shortages were controlled by mechanisms or practices, which were particularly effective for managing short- term scarcity. The modem circumstances where much of the biodiversity has disappeared and the dependence on the ecosystem to supply food, medicines and textiles has also all but disappeared. However lessons can be learned from practices of the past even in the much-depleted situation today.

SETTING THE SCENE WITH TIKANGA (PRACTICES) WHICH CAN HAVE APPLICATION TODAY Rahui Tikanga were often applied to situations on land (whenua) in the forest (wao) or in lakes (roto), rivers (awa) and the sea (moana). One of these practices is the rahui, which was temporary ban from use as a result of local scarcity or some event that might cause the resource not to be used. An example of this is where a drowning has occurred of a member of the kin group in the area in a fishing ground -fishing would cease for a period to ensure the mana of the group is not defiled by, in essence “eating your own.” Rahui would be used for a variety of reasons, one of those being to preserve a stock where it is being threatened by overuse. This can includes stocks that are used for medicinal purposes, for gathering materials for weavings and making clothing or food sources. Tapu Where a permanent restriction was required the area could have a tapu placed on it, which prevented any use until at a much later date that tapu or restrictions was lifted. The effect of a tapu was to make something beyond everyday use -some translate the term as sacred as opposed to profane (noa). The use of tapu as with rahui were broad on so areas where people had been killed in battle, where people were buried and so on became wahi tapu (sacred places). From these area food could not be gathered and there was restriction even on the gathering of firewood for the cooking

• fires. Breaches of these restrictions was often severe to the point where a serious breach might see a

person and their family banished and forced to start another settlement well away from the kainga (village). Tohunga The tohunga (people able to set a rahui or tapu) had considerable power and they often had a great deal of knowledge about the natural resources with which they were dealing. Many resented the power of the tohunga and with the arrival of Christianity their power was much reduced. Their power was further reduced by the passage of the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907. This Act was

• stensibly to stop 'quackery' and the medicinal practices of the tohunga. Many Maori chose to see

the tohunga and not the European doctors. The tohunga were often the natural scientists that had great knowledge of the use and management

• f natural resources and passed that knowledge onto selected recipients. Because of that knowledge

he held a lot of power in a tribe, often as much as a Chief who stayed in place at the will of the people. Much of the knowledge and the practices that persist today came from the tohunga. Unfortunately much knowledge from the tohunga was also lost. Matauranga Maori (Maori Knowledge Systems) The demise of the tohunga also served to severely reduce the knowledge systems build up over a long period, which had advised Maori about flora and fauna in particular. The knowledge system

had detailed accounts of the management of even the most seemingly unimportant creature or plant. These were often put into a tribal context. Aperahama Taonui described a Ngati Whatua practice of making an offering to Hine Kui, the original possessor of the land, who manifests in the hump-backed tiger beetle grub (Neocicindela tuberculata): 'that grass is sacred because it is food which is taken [to Hine Kui]. That is the true chief of this land.2 In the 1980s children of Tai Tokerau still 'fished' for Hine Kui by poking grass straws down the burrows of tiger beetle grubs. The issue of bio-prospecting and Maori knowledge systems particularly over rongoa (medicines prepared from plants and animals) have been a cause of issues related to intellectual property rights. One school of thought is that the knowledge is the property of a tribal group (Iwi or Hapu) whereas

• thers have seen these matters held by families and passed exclusively from generation to

generation. In the 1980's, among rural Tai Tokerau in Northland, kuia (women elders) with knowledge of rongoa treated members of their whanau (extended families). However, the great repositories of knowledge of rongoa are the tohunga. Healing practices are passed down lines of teacher-practitioners, so that each tohunga practices and develops a particular inherited tradition. These knowledge-traditions are not necessarily lines of direct genealogical descent, but tohunga are usually politically aligned with their hapu and iwi.3 Nga Ringa Whakahaere 0 Te Iwi Maori, The National Body of Traditional Healers states: Maori traditional healers are the guardians and gatekeepers of the intellectual properties of Maori traditional healing pertaining to rongoa rakau (healing plants), rakau rongoa (medicines derived from these plants), and tikanga rongoa (the customs and practices associated with healing in traditional terms). The control of all these taonga is inherently with each iwi whose voices are heard through the national body, Nga Ringa Whakahare 0 Te Iwi Maori.4 Kaitiakitanga Kaitiakitanga is a word that may not have existed in traditional times, however the practice certainly

• did. The work is made up of the root 'tiaki' to guard or to keep. Add the prefix 'kai' it becomes

kaitiaki -a guardian. Add the suffix 'tanga' and it becomes 'kaitiakitanga' or the exercise of

• guardianship. In tradition kaitiaki or guardians were often from the resource itself. For example in

an eel (tuna) fishery there were kaitiaki, which had to be preserved. These were the older eels (and larger and often 30 years old or more) and in the eel migration to the ocean at breeding time (a very specific time of year), the old eels, migrate last and tend to travel with their heads out of the water. This was the sign to the fishermen who had reaped the bounteous harvest to stop fishing. The kaitiaki could not be taken. Scientists have found these older eels' contribution to the returning glass eel and elver population is much higher than their younger counterparts. Maintaining the kaitiaki function in relation to a resource is an exercise of kaitiakitanga that maintains the resource's stock, which in turn maintains the people.

In the modem context kaitiaki are often the people who maintain kaitiakitanga .principles, by having a very good knowledge of the resource. Much of this knowledge is being supported by scientific evidence. MODERN MECHANISMS—TRADITIONAL CONCEPTS Nga Whenua Rahui This is an example of a policy, which takes parts of traditional concepts to apply to modem

• situations. It applies to areas of land covered with indigenous forests on Maori owned land. It is a

voluntary mechanism that has of one of its objectives the preservation of biodiversity. It is a policy that assists Maori landowners to maintain their indigenous forests and is assisted with part of the cost of doing that by Government grant. The Maori landowners apply to the fund, managed by the Department of Conservation for funding to assist with weed and pest control and fencing in the

• block. To get the funding the owners need to sign up to a conservation covenant for a 21-year
• period. In the agreement entered into the owner have rights of access to the block and limited use of

the block for cultural purposes. This may .include gathering of plant materials for rongoa (medicines) and for weaving and in some circumstances for mahi whakairo (trees for carving). Each agreement is drawn up for a particular block setting out the mutually agreed objectives. The landowners do not lose ownership of the land and the limited term covenants leave future options

• pen to some extent. Biodiversity preservation is improved although perhaps not to the highest
• level. The issue of loss of control by the owners is an important one, given also that there may be a

large number of owners in a block. Weed and pest control programmes may be operated in common with any conservation reserves in the area. This policy has been running for some year very successfully and those who have opted to be in the scheme are strong supporters of it. There has been 236,740 hectares (584,747.8 acres) of privately owned, Maori land, with indigenous forest protected in the last 10 years. Mataitai Reserves Mataitai reserves are a marine reserve for local tribal groups, however their purpose in not primarily

• ne of biodiversity conservation. In fact the only marine equivalent, which is purely for

preservation purposes is the marine reserve. The mataitai reserve however does have things in common with the Nga Whenua Rahui mechanism, in that local Maori can have a degree of control

• ver local areas (mataitai). The establishment of the equivalent of local by-law making powers can

allow local tribes to exercise a degree of control over the reserve and the activities in that mataitai

• reserve. One of the results of the establishment of a mataitai reserve is the exclusion of commercial

fishing inside the reserve. The mataitai however is a managed area where customary fishing practices can be exercised and cultural harvest obtained. This creates a more managed situation for the local tangata whenua (people of the land) where they take fish, but they also directly manage their taking. These areas however cannot exclude other non-commercial (amateur) fishing. This may prove to be their undoing especially if a group takes great cares to manage an area only to have it decimated by either legitimate amateur or through illegal harvest. I note that illegal harvest of cultural species is a major

• problem. From my tribal area this is major concern as the area has a large remote coastline that are

poorly policed and illegal fishing is driven by high black market prices. Tribal fisheries officers have limited powers and ability to contribute significantly to the controlling of well-organised illegal fishing. Taiapure Taiapure are local non-commercial Maori fishing areas that are designated clearly as Maori fishing

• areas. Taiapure are very similar to the mataitai reserve however they are established through a

different and much more bureaucratic process. Taiapure are non-commercial zones set up to manage particular species. The area to be reserved is gazetted to ensure commercial fishers have them registered on their charts as exclusive non-commercial zones. Taiapure are managed more for the maintenance of certain stocks although again not primarily for biodiversity conservation purposes however they can serve to help that purpose. Marine Reserves The Marine Reserves is a general mechanism to provide an area of no taking of any species of fish, shellfish or seaweed. The objective is to have a fully protected area of the sea delineated with clear boundaries, which is used only for recreation that is non- extractive. Marine reserves are fully gazetted however their management does not have direct influence and the landward side (if they have one). For example if an emergency sewage discharge exists or is proposed into the reserve the presence of the reserve might not affect the decision for that discharge to be continued or in fact installed. Marine reserves in combination with taiapure or mataitai could perhaps provide some useful

• synergies. As yet however the development of all of these forms of trying to better manage marine

areas, have moved slowly and in many cases are being actively opposed by commercial fishers who see their creation as seriously affected the ability to fish commercially. This includes the very significant Maori commercial fishing sector, which is now a very significant part of the total commercial fishery. Kaitiakitanga and the Resource Management Act We have met the tradition of kaitiakitanga above, however the practice does have recognition in New Zealand's Resource Management Act 1991. The Act provides for the recognition of kaitiakitanga without further explaining how it might be used except that it provides a definition for the term as follows: The exercise of guardianship by the tangata whenua5 of an area in accordance with tikanga Maori in relation to natural resources and includes the ethic of stewardship. The use of the term kaitiakitanga, has been limited however in terms of the objective of maintaining biological diversity, could yet prove to be an effective way to recognised those with authority being able to maintain an ecosystem. The potential is certainly there in the Act but is use has yet to fully develop.

TAONGA VERSUS ICON6 SPECIES MANAGEMENT There are many issues associated with species management as compared with the broader ecosystem management. In New Zealand for a considerable time, emphasis has been on preserving endangered and threatened species. That focus was appropriate with so many species on the endangered or the threatened list. I believe the endangered and threatened species practice is work that should be complementary to the work on endangered ecosystems. Icon species tend to be selected in part at least on the basis of some sort of cultural preference. Typical icon species are the kakapo (native parrot), black robin, kiwi, and the tuatara. Typical taonga species include giant kokopu (fish of the galaxid family), kereru (wood pigeon) and the koura (freshwater crayfish). Many of the taonga species are neither threatened no endangered however they are important culturally and often commercially (for food). Harakeke I will give one example of a species of plant, which is far from endangered, and in certain circumstances is regarded as a weed, however for Maori is highly prized and is truly a taonga. Maori call it harakeke (common flax -genus Phormium). Scientist distinguish just two species of flax, however Maori have named some 200 varieties .many of which are a valuable part of the of the taonga raranga or weaving resources, used for all sorts of garments by Maori weavers today. The weavers highly value certain varieties of harakeke. Fortunately a collection of these various flaxes, has been maintained to ensure the genetic stock remains available. The collection is held by

• ne of the Crown Research Institutes, Maanaki Whenua—Landcare Research.7 Weavers continue

to be able to take stock from the collection to ensure the varieties favoured by the weavers are available. Flax was once part of a major industry that has long been in decline or non-existence. As a modem cultural resource flax is enjoying a return to popularity and again the old varieties are being sought with a whole variety of new uses including use in the decorative market, modem clothing and in paper making. Kereru or Kukupa (Native Wood Pigeon) The kereru thrived in the berry laden podocarp forest. Captain Cook and his crew saw the tall forest as a great source of masts and spars for sailing ships and indeed these .became a significant source for the British Navy for many years. Maori maintained stands of these tall trees on the swamplands in particular as a source of birds (for food) and berries. The British Navy wanted them retained as a source of masts and spars and others to maintain the wetlands. However in the colonial era the greatest pressure was for land to be cleared to be drained for pasture and imported stock. That pressure by and large, won out and large-scale clearances went ahead with the forests being burned, drained and planted with pasture. The kereru in the meantime had adapted somewhat to a changed environment, and was protected by

• statute. However the kereru has suffered greatly from the massive loss of habitat and now is a

threatened species. The kereru is a large, plump bird which when having feasted on the miro berries, comes already stuffed, dressed and ready for the oven. It is hard for the Maori palette to change completely to lamb brisket and to forget the kereru.

By the turn of the 20th century conservation had become the driving force behind Government policy8 and the position of the drive for cultural harvest by Maori was lost to absolute protection. Maori sought the right to the cultural harvest as a right guaranteed under the Treaty of Waitangi, and are still doing so in the Waitangi Tribunal.9 On the other side of the ledger Maori are involved in a number of partnership arrangements with the Department of Conservation to try to restore the kereru populations through breeding programmes and forest conservation. The desire to have kereru remain may well drive the means to it survival long term. Inanga There are a variety of these small fish that spend part of their life cycle in the sea and part in fresh

• water. Inanga are often grouped under the common name of whitebait (which refers to the juvenile

form) of the galaxid family. The whitebait fishery is a regulated one where the catch is taken in a limited season with gear that is proscribed in regulation. By and large the fishers are non-Maori and are amateur. All agree that the stock is over-fished and has depleted however little is done except some minor tightening of the regulation. The adult fish are not sought after by these fishers and not so much now by Maori. Maori programmes whether they are looking broadly at conservation of ecosystems or individual species have a strong focus on sustainable use than pure preservation. There has been work to see what effect various acclimatised and introduced fish were having on the inanga populations. The results of those studies are not fully conclusive. The other main effect on the population of inanga is the habitat at the margins of streams, estuaries and sometimes lakes where the eggs hatch after having been deposited on the spring tide. The effect of grazing stock especially has adversely affected this habitat and so the inanga population. HOW TREATY OF WAITANGI CLAIMS SETTLEMENTS MAY BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO

BIODIVERSITY PROTECTION

In the settlement of land claims by Maori against breaches of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi caused by act or omissions of the Crown (the Government) there are a number of mechanisms available in the settlement negotiation process for tribes who are settling their claims to gain much greater controls of natural resources especially those associated with land previously held by the Crown. Indigenous Flora and Fauna and Maori Intellectual Property claim (Wai 262) In 1991 a group of Maori claimants on behalf of six tribes scattered throughout Aotearoa/New Zealand lodge a claim with the Waitangi Tribunal related to effects on indigenous flora and fauna. It also focused on Maori intellectual property rights particularly those related to the uses of indigenous flora and fauna, but limited to that. This is a large and complex claim that is midway through the process of inquiry. The .Waitangi Tribunal has heard most of the traditional evidence that has ranges from a full exposition of the Maori worldview as it related to the natural (and supernatural) world. The scope of the claim includes the ownership and use of indigenous flora and fauna and their genetic resources, related knowledge and intellectual property rights, and their management and conservation. It looks into bio-diversity and traditional knowledge. This a major challenge for all concerned in the process and may take some time yet before the Tribunal is able to fully report on all the issues contained in the

• claim. For further information on this claim as it develops visit the Waitangi Tribunal web site at:

www.waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz. CONCLUDING COMMENTS Maori have an active role in Aotearoa/New Zealand in the maintenance of indigenous biodiversity. The approach is likely to differ considerably from that of the majority conservationists. Maori will have a focus on maintaining species for a sustainable harvest for use, however there is a clear recognition that certain species are endangered or threatened and need to be assisted just to survive. There are policies and practices that are unique to Maori and often have their roots in traditional . knowledge and practice. There is cause for optimism however much needs to be done and learned. Maori can be regarded as part of the problem in maintaining bio-diversity or can be enlisted to be an active part of the solution. Maintaining species, which are of special significance to Maori because they have been taken for food or other destructive use, may well be the lever for very active Maori roles in the restoration of habitat and restoration of the actual species. Maori do control significant parts of the natural world and a balanced partnership such as through Nga Whenua Rahui are a good means to ensuring the biodiversity agenda is achieved. In selecting what is on the menu for assistance consideration needs to be given to cultural preferences especially those of the indigenous people.

1 There are two species of New Zealand bat that are endemic, as are all four frogs, all sixty reptiles, more than 90% of

insects and a similar proportion of marine molluscs, about 80% of all vascular plants, and a quarter of all bird species. In contrast, the United Kingdom has only one endemic animal and one plant species.

2 Simmons, D.R., The Great New Zealand Myth, Wellington, Reed, 1976, p. 29. 3 Pond, Wendy, The Land With All Woods and Water, Waitangi Tribunal, Rangahaua Whanui National Theme U, June

1997, p. 30-31.

4 Pond, Wendy, p. 31. 5 Tribe or land-owning group that have customary authority. 6 Taonga -literally treasured possession. Icon species are those that are held high in public regard. 7 New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy, February 2000, One Chance to Turn the Tide, Whakakohukihukitia Te Tai Roroku

ki te Tai Oranga.

8 Feldman, James W, Treaty Rights and Pigeon Poaching, Alienation of Maori Access to Kereru, 1864 -1960, Waitangi

Tribunal Publication 2001, Wellington, New Zealand.

9 Waitangi Tribunal claim, Wai 262, Indigenous Flora and Fauna and Maori Intellectual Property Rights lodged in 1991,

currently in inquiry.