|
 The
Great Barrier Island State of Environment Report (SOER) – a major
project for the GBICT trustees in 2009 – was completed and ‘launched’ in
February 2010. The timing, as it turned out, could not have been better.
In the same month the Department of Conservation announced probable
major cut-backs to its staff at Port FitzRoy, while the National
Government leaked its intention to make a ‘stocktake’ of the mineral
potential beneath previously protected lands in National Parks and
elsewhere. As one of the areas earmarked for potential mining was Te
Ahumata (Whitecliffs) on Great Barrier Island, both these issues had
strong implications for the future economy and environment of the
island. Also, in both cases, the SOER was immediately relevant,
providing information on the significance of the endangered species, and
the relatively high biodiversity and unspoiled environment, of Great
Barrier Island.
It is clear that conservation and the
unique biota of New Zealand are under threat from the National
Government. Cut backs to DOC are only the tip of the ice-berg – but it
seems bizarre that an island which is recognised in the Conservation
Management Strategy as one of the key conservation areas near Auckland
and “the jewel of the Hauraki Gulf” should be singled out for reduction
in administrative priority. Loss of half-a-dozen jobs in the north of
Great Barrier Island may not seem important in Wellington, but it has
repercussions for all aspects of the economy and social structure of the
small community there. The Trust made a strong submission on this to the
Minister of Conservation, local MPs, and the Auckland Conservator.
The schedule 4 ‘stock-take’ breaks a deal
with the New Zealand public. Land covered in native ecosystems,
uninhabited and largely untouched by man, is an increasingly rare
commodity worldwide. Schedule 4 was created to protect New Zealand’s
exceptional places from inappropriate developments with large
environmental impacts, such as mining.
And, in creating Schedule 4, there
was also an understanding of the growing role of international tourism
in the New Zealand economy, and the role such places played in the
furtherance of this, and in propagating a ‘clean-green’ international
image. Great Barrier Island epitomises this image.
At a meeting hosted by the Community Board
in Claris in April, it was good to see and hear the clarity and
vehemence with which some 200 residents rejected the so called
‘stock-take’ and demanded that Te Ahumata be left untouched. The message
was that past exploitation has brought few lasting benefits to the
island, and that Te Ahumata should remain as a magnificent and
accessible area for the enjoyment of current and future residents. The
importance of the environment is clearly understood when it comes to the
obvious industrial impacts of mining, toxic waste, and tailings
disposal. The economic benefits were clearly seen as small and of no
consequence compared to the potential for long-term damage. It is
perhaps a pity that the devastating impacts of rats and feral cats on
our ecosystems are not so clearly understood, nor are the possible
long-term sustainable economic benefits of a pest-free status
recognised. However, on the mining issue at least the Trust found itself
in total agreement with the majority of islanders. If the Community
Board was split before that meeting, it could have no doubt where it
should stand to support the community after it. And, to her credit, the
National MP for Auckland, Nikki Kaye, was also highly supportive of the
no-mining lobby.
The Ministry of Economic Development
Discussion Paper, entitled “Maximising our Mineral Potential” is
pathetically weak – a poorly disguised attempt to fool people into
thinking that mining will bring economic – and conservation (!) – gains
from mineral royalties. The actual conservation information in the
document is so scant that it confirms the extent to which the Department
has been side-lined. For example, the ‘Conservation Value’ of Te Ahumata
receives four (unreferenced) sentences.
The Trust made a strong eleven page
submission, based on factual evidence about the endangered plants, birds
and reptiles occurring, or probably occurring, on Te Ahumata. We also
analysed the geological and economic basis for the claimed value of the
mineral deposits on the island, and found them to be inadequate or
flawed. We drew particular attention to the question of the disposal of
the waste rock (tailings), and the risks to water quality and the
Kaitoke Swamp ecosystem.
However, the protests, including the 40,000 people marching in Auckland
on May Day, have left many residents thinking that mining will never
occur on Great Barrier. I do not share that complacency, and I urge all
of you who are opposed to mining to make your voice known in Wellington,
especially to Nikki Kaye. Web addresses are listed at the end of this
piece.
Having the factual back-up of the SOER the
Trust felt in a much stronger position to comment on the above issues.
Moreover, the launch of the SOER, at the 10th Anniversary celebrations
of the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park on Motutapu in February (See page 13)
brought us into positive contact with other bodies involved in the care
of the Hauraki Gulf environment. As a consequence of these contacts with
the Hauraki Gulf Forum at the Symposium on the Hauraki Gulf, and the
Auckland Conservation Board one of our key recommendations – the need
for a full-scale feasibility study of rat and feral cat eradication on
Great Barrier – was endorsed by both bodies. We also made a verbal
presentation to the Great Barrier Island Community Board, and we will
continue to work with the community towards the aim of a pest-free
island.
Many environmental issues – toxin use in
biodiversity protection, the role of DOC as an employee on the island,
the effects of a possible mine on Te Ahumata – have been to the fore
this summer. Strong views have been expressed on both sides of these
debates, but some common ground is discernable. The Community Board has
been active in facilitating discussion. The trust welcomes this – it has
had a voice on all these issues. The community now has a substantial
document to be used for the advocacy and environmental protection of
Great Barrier Island and a sustainable future for its community. Once
again the Trust wishes to express its thanks to everyone who helped with
it.
References
The Ministry of Economic Development Discussion Paper:
www.med.govt.nz/schedule4
30 Seconds submission against mining on Great Barrier:
www.greatbarrieris.co.nz
Great Barrier Island State of Environment Report on line:
www.gbict.co.nz
Nikki Kaye (Nat. MP. Auckland central)
nikki.kaye@parliament.govt.nz |
