A Cultural Impact Assessment
of the Matata Wastewater Scheme.
The senior Ngati Rangitihi Chief Tangihia Tionga (1778-1870)
Produced by Tangihia Consultants and Associates Ltd
For the Tangihia Hapu
in regard to
Resource Consent Application # 67708 for
the Matata Wastewater scheme
Revised Edition 5th May 2014
Ko Tarawera te Maunga
Ko Te Awa o Te Atua te Awa
Ko Te Arawa te waka
Ko Tangihia te Hapu
Ko Ngati Rangitihi te Iwi
INTELLECTUAL_PROPERTY
The Ngati Rangitihi Raupatu Trust Incorporated retains all intellectual property rights over
information and material gathered for and included in this report. This report is available to the
Whakatane District Council and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council for reference in the planning of
and applications for resource consents for the Whakatane District Council’s Matata Waste Scheme in
relation to which the Whakatane District Council has applied for Resource Consents under
Application number 67708. The use of this report by the Whakatane District Council or any other
party in any other circumstances (e.g. subsequent resource consent applications for other projects)
shall be subject to the written approval of the Ngati Rangitihi Raupatu Trust Inc.
Table of Contents
1
Introduction...............................................................................................page 1
2
Tangihia Whakapapa..........................................................................................2
3
Matauranga.........................................................................................................3
4
Ngati Rangitihi Raupatu Trust Inc.......................................................................3
5
The Tangihia Hapu..............................................................................................4
6
Wahi Tapu...........................................................................................................4
7
Consultation....................................................................................................... 5
8
Cultural Issues Indentified...................................................................................7
9
Conclusion..........................................................................................................12
10
Map of Matata......................................................................................................14
11
Map of Oronomaru...............................................................................................14
APPENDIX”A” Conditions of Consent..............................................................................15
An Assessment of the Cultural Impact of the Matata Wastewater Scheme
By Tangihia Consultants and Associates Limited
1
Introduction
This report is an assessment of the cultural impacts of the proposed the Matata Wastewater scheme
and how these impacts could be lessened.
It has arisen because the Whakatane District Council has applied to the Bay of Plenty Regional
Council for Resource Consents under the Resource Management Act for a proposed pressure
Wastewater Water scheme for Matata; and
There are major aspects of the Matata Wastewater Scheme as proposed by the Whakatane District
Council which are culturally unacceptable to the Tangihia Hapu and Ngati Rangitihi generally as
documented in this Cultural Impact Assessment Report.
Matata is our Turangawaewae and the site of our only Rangitihi Marae; and
By declaring Matata a “Maintenance Zone” The Regional Council have placed the Tangata whenua of
Matata in a bind where we either have to pay for expensive upgrades to our septic tanks or else opt
for the proposed Wastewater scheme being proposed by the Whakatane District Council.
With the level of deprivation in Matata designated nine out of ten on the New Zealand Deprivation
Index the majority of Tangata whenua are being forced to opt for the proposed Matata Wastewater
Scheme.
The Whakatane District Council has applied for Resource Consents for a “pressure” type Wastewater
Scheme for Matata in which:




Each household is to have a grinder pump inside a holding tank with a 24 hour holding
capacity; and
The grinder pump will be connected by a small diameter pipe to a plastic road side sewer main ;
and
The sewer mains will carry raw sewerage to a treatment plant that will be located on Oniao land
to the East of Matata; and
Partially treated Wastewater is to be pumped from the treatment plant to a Wastewater
Disposal Area located on sand dunes East of the Tarawera River mouth.
1
2
Whakapapa
We have an indigenous culture in which we whakapapa to our environment, we are part of our
environment and our environment forms part of our inner stream of consciousness that defines our
identity as a people.
Our Tupuna always maintained Ahika (occupation) in the Matata Coastal area since the arrival of the
Arawa waka although it was often at great cost because we were always vulnerable to attacks by
Northern tribes.
Ngati Mahi, the Tangihia Hapu (Ngati Tionga), Ngati Ihu and TeWareiti are the four engaged Hapu of
Ngati Rangitihi that are recognised by the Crown today.
Our Arawa Tupuna (ancestors) arrived on the first voyage of Te Arawa Waka and they first made
land fall on the beach just to the East of Matata (Otamarora) in 1350 AD.
The landing place of the Arawa waka was named Kopua Kuku which denoted the muscle power it
took to re-launch it for voyage along the coast of Tai-a-Paniwhaniwha to Maketu.
The Tangihia Hapu (Ngati Tionga) of Ngati Rangitihi are direct descendants of the Tainui Chief
Tangiharuru, the Mataatua Chiefs Toroa and Pukeko and the Arawa Chiefs Tamatekapua, Rangitihi
Mahi, Tuwharetoa, Tamamutu and Rangiwewehi.
However while our Tangihia Hapu have strong Toroa and Pukeko descent lines we are principally
Arawa because when it comes to intertribal marriages traditionally all things being equal the male
line is regarded as being the strongest
The Mataatua Whakapapa of David Potter below is typical of the Tangihia Hapu of Ngati Rangitihi.
Totora
Wairaka
Tamatea Kitehuatahi
Wimua
Tapui
Tamate pihiorehua
Tauru o-te-rangi
Irapeke
Awatope
Koira
Pukeko
Tutehoenga
Tawari
Tamakaitawhiti
Te Amo
Whaeateao
Tamakoe
Tewhareiti
Rotokohu
Tionga
Tangihia Tionga
Tangihia Tionga
Ngatiira Tangihia
Ngatiira Tangihia
Amelia Savage
Amelia Savage
Thomas Tangihia
Thomas Tangihia
David Potter
David Potter
2
3
Matauranga
The Tangihia Hapu descends through the Senior Ngati Rangitihi Chief Tangihia Tionga from the
marriage of Rotohohu (of Ngati Pukeko) to Tionga which delineates us from the rest of Ngati
Rangitihi. Because of our strong Pukeko and Toroa whakapapa lines we are Waitangi claimants to
the Oronomura area (which is the proposed Wastewater Disposal Area) between Otara-o-Muturangi
and Wahieroa (at the end of Walker Road.)
Around three centuries ago the number of our Ngati Pukeko Tupuna had out grown the available
food resources in the Rangitaiki River Valley so they relocated to the coast East of Matata.
As was the Custom our Tupuna brought the bones of their dead with them and they reburied them
along the Oronomura area (the strip of sand dunes between Otara-o- Muturangi and Wahieroa) thus
forming a tapu barrier in order to protect themselves from attackers from the sea.
Ngati Pukeko subsequently built the Matata Pa which was described John Wilson who visited the
area in 1839 “as singularly situated on a small island surrounded by the most extensive swamps.”
The Matata Pa had an area of several acres and building it involved mining thousands of cubic
meters of sand from the inside toe of the adjacent sand dunes and transporting it by waka to the Pa
construction site.
The most extensive swamps as described by John Wilson are gone today but the earth works of the
Matata Pa site remain on the corner of Thornton and Grieg Road. The Pa site and the fan of
undulations on the inside edge of the adjacent sand dunes where the sand was mined are quite
discernable in satellite photographs of the area.
4
The Ngati Rangitihi Raupatu Trust.
The Ngati Rangitihi Raupatu Trust Inc. (the Trust) has a data base of about two thousand Ngati
Rangitihi members the majority of whom belong to the Tangihia Hapu.

The Trust represents the Wai 996 cluster of seventeen Historic Ngati Rangitihi Whanau,
Hapu and Iwi Waitangi Tribunal claims that include the coastal area affected by the Matata
Wastewater Scheme. The trust also has three contemporary claims represented by legal
counsel for urgent hearing currently before the Tribunal.

The Trust also represents the Tangihia Hapu who the Crown has accepted as applicants for
the Recognition of Customary Practises and Customary Marine title under the Takutai
Moana Act 2011.
The Customary Marine area of the Tangihia Hapu extends along the coast from Otamarakau East
past Otara-o-Muturangi to Wahieroa and twenty five miles out to sea.
3
5
The Tangihia Hapu (Ngati Tionga)
From the late 1700s it was the Tangihia Hapu who maintained Ahika on the coast from Otamarakau
to Otara-o-Muturangi whereas the other Ngati Rangitihi hapu: Ngati Mahi ,Tewhareiti and Ngati Ihu
were based at inland kainga on the shores of Lakes Rotoma, Okataina, Tarawera and Rotomahana.
The Tarawera eruption in 1886 changed everything and forced the rest of Ngati Rangitihi and those
who were only related to Ngati Rangitihi to join the Tangihia Hapu on the Coast in the Matata area.
Several generations have passed and while we are all Tangata whenua in Matata today the proposed
Wastewater Scheme will impact on Wahi Tapu areas which are sacred to the Tangihia Hapu.
In our Culture our Wahi Tapu (sacred spaces) have particular cultural worth and deep spiritual
meaning.
This presents us with a dilemma because for strong spiritual reasons the significance of these sacred
spaces is part of our heritage and the matauranga about them belongs to the Tangihia Hapu and not
to the public generally.
Our Tangihia Hapu has carefully maintained a culture of silence about the location of our Wahi Tapu
sites and Tapu areas, particularly about where the bones of our ancestors are buried. This is why we
have deliberately avoided registering our Wahi Tapu sites with the Historic Places Trust and why we
have not had a silent file with the Whakatane District Council.
Until now silence has been used as a protection mechanism so our sacred areas are not desecrated
by archaeologists, by artefact hunters and by the public in general.
6
Wahi Tapu (sacred places)
There are many Wahi Tapu areas in and around the Matata but it is just the following areas that will
be desecrated by the Matata Wastewater Scheme:

The Wastewater disposal site which is in the Oronomura area where is where the bones of our
Ngati Pukeko Tupuna were buried and where fifty Kingites including several Ngati Awa Chiefs
were buried in the area in the aftermath of the battle of Kaokaoroa; and

Section 4 on the corner of Heale and Mair Streets is a Wahi Tapu site that is vested in the
Otamarora Trust ; and

The Tapu site marked with a white cross on the roadside verge in Heale Street (on the Western
side of the Waitepuru Stream: GPS co-ordinates -37.890079, 176.759886); and


The Wahi Tapu site on the corner of Arawa Street and St John Street is where the Tionga
Wharenui (the house of Tionga) was located from the mid 1700s until 1928 and it is where many
of our Tangihia ancestors are buried; and
The bone scraping area on the slope below the Urupa at the Rangitihi Marae and the bone
washing area on the opposite side of the Thornton Road.
See maps page 14
4
6.1 Te Tiriti o Waitangi
Te Tiriti is relevant to the Whakatane District Council’s application for Resource Consent for the
Matata Wastewater Scheme because under Te Tiriti o Waitangi the Crown guaranteed to protect our
absolute authority over our lands and all possessions including taonga as long as we wish to retain
them.
6.2
Legislation
The Resource Management Act 1991(RMA)
The RMA enshrines the Crowns obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the Resource Consent
process where cultural issues such as Wahi Tapu are concerned. Section six and eight of the RMA
include specific reference to Wahi Tapu:
6.3
Sec 6:
In achieving the purpose of this act, all person exercising functions and powers
under it, in relation to managing the use, development and protection of natural and
physical resources, shall recognize and provide for the following matters of national
importance:
(e)
the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands ,
waters, wahi tapu, and other taonga (Parliamentary Counsel Office 2008).
The Takutai Moana Act (2011)
Furthermore under the Takutai Moana Act (2011) applicants for Permits or Resource Consents
affecting our Customary Marine area (in this case the Whakatane District Council) are required to
consult with the Tangihia Hapu.
7
Consultation
The Whakatane District Council has been consulting with the Tangihia Hapu Takutai Moana
Applicants on the proposed Matata Wastewater Scheme as required under the Takutai Moana Act
(2011).
In order to be fully informed we have been conducting inquiries about existing pressure
wastewater treatment installations and about alternative types of Wastewater Schemes:
5

We have studied a report by engineers on the problems that have arisen with the operation
pressure Wastewater Systems that was installed in the State of Victoria in 2001; and

We have investigated the viability of Vacuum Wastewater Schemes; and

We have investigated the functioning of the Maketu Pressure Wastewater Scheme; and

We have consulted with Sustainable Matata Inc, a significant Matata Community representative
entity; and

We have consulted with the Ministry of Heath on the alternative of composting toilets; and

We attended a meeting of the Kahui Kaumatua on the Matata Wastewater Scheme ; and

We have consulted with the pollution control officer for the BOP Regional Council on a pollution
problem we have identified with the proposed pressure Wastewater Scheme for Matata; and

We have applied to the Electricity Authority to have households with sewerage pressure pumps
recognised as a sub set of vulnerable consumers; and

We have been consulting with the Tangihia Hapu on the preparation of the this report; and

We have consulted with the Tangihia Hapu on the responses by the Whakatane District Council
on the ways in which to lessen the cultural impacts of the Matata Wastewater Scheme and the
“Conditions of Consent “the Tangihia Hapu requires.
In summary:
As a result of engaging in consultation, our inquiries with the Department of Health and together
our other investigations we believe we are now becoming more fully informed to assess the
cultural impacts of the proposed Wastewater scheme.
6
8
Cultural issues identified
The proposed Matata Wastewater scheme raises significant cultural issues for the Tangihia Hapu
and Ngati Rangitihi generally as follows:

The reticulation of the town will desecrate our Wahi Tapu and this is culturally unacceptable;
and

Disposing of partially treated wastewater in our environment is culturally unacceptable; and

The disposing of partially treated wastewater in a Wahi Tapu area where the bones of our
Tupuna were buried is culturally unacceptable; and

To simply rely on the accidental discovery of koiwi and archaeological artefacts in this
technological era when Ground Penetrating Radar is available is culturally unacceptable; and

Locating the Wastewater Treatment Plant in proximity South East of our Rangitihi Marae is
culturally unacceptable; and

The effect of the rates increase and higher electricity bills on Ngati Rangitihi will have
unacceptable cultural consequences; and

A “pressure” Wastewater Scheme where sewerage overflows will occur once our electricity is
disconnected is culturally unacceptable; and

A pressure Wastewater scheme that can leak raw sewerage into our environment is culturally
unacceptable; and

The increased contamination of our customary Marine area by Matata’s partially treated
Wastewater is culturally unacceptable.
7
8.1
Wastewater treatment
The disposal of partially treated wastewater containing pathogens in our environment is culturally
unacceptable.
Ultra violet light (UV) treatment could be used to kill the pathogens in the wastewater however UV
light treatment has not included by the Whakatane District Council in the proposed Matata
Wastewater Scheme and this is culturally unacceptable.
Whakatane District Council Engineers have indicated the maximum estimated cost of UV
treatment is two hundred thousand Dollars which seems to us to be an inconsequential amount
given the Matata Wastewater scheme is now estimated to cost over thirteen million dollars.
8.2
The Wastewater disposal area
Disposing of partially treated wastewater in an area where the bones of our ancestors are buried
is culturally unacceptable.
Ground Penetrating Radar exists in this technological era and we know it was used to find unmarked
graves in the sand on the Otago Peninsular.
Like in the Otago Peninsular case the bones of our Tupuna are buried in sand and therefore we
believe it should be possible for the Whakatane District Council to locate them for removal in the
Wastewater disposal area by using Ground Penetrating Radar.
Archaeological artefacts are also very significant cultural items.
The old Whakatane Road used by travellers for hundreds of years skirted the inside toe of the sand
dunes in the wastewater disposal area. We have been told by a prominent historian that it could be
a treasure trove of archaeological artefacts.
Likewise the Treatment Plant area could also be a treasure trove of archaeological artefacts because
British troops were stationed there for many years in colonial times. The treatment plant area it was
part of troop’s parade ground and their shooting range.
We also believe it is possible that burials took place in the treatment plant area during the 1918 flu
epidemic.
8
Later during World War 11 the American Army was stationed at the Rangitihi Marae and the
Americans also used the Treatment plant area as part of their parade ground (Bull Ring) and for their
rifle range.
Our ancestors bones and archaeological artefacts are very vulnerable to destruction by earth
moving machinery and therefore it is not cultural acceptable for ground work to begin without the
Wastewater disposal area and the treatment plant first being scanned with GPR to locate any
Koiwi and archaeological artefacts for safe removal.
8.3
The accidental discovery protocol.
The accidental discovery protocol is culturally unacceptable to the Tangihia Hapu.
Historically we were the Tangata whenua of the Matata Coastal area and it was not until 1886 when
the Tarawera Eruption occurred that the other hapu of Ngati Rangitihi joined us permanently on the
coast in the Matata area.
It was only then that Ngati Mahi displaced by the Tarawera eruption established a Wharenui and an
Urupa at Te Rangitai East of Matata.
Hence as the original Tangata whenua of the Matata coastal area any Koiwi discovered during the
Matata Wastewater project will most likely be the bones of our Tupuna.
The Iwi person employed by the Whakatane District Council under the “accidental discovery
protocol” is not a member of our Tangihia Hapu and this is culturally unacceptable.
There are appropriate members Tangihia Hapu who are available to supervise the handling of our
ancestors bones and archaeological artefacts when they are discovered by accident or when they
have been located with Ground Penetrating Radar.
9
8.4
The proximity of the Treatment Plant to our Rangitihi Marae
It is culturally unacceptable to locate the proposed Sewerage Treatment Plant South East of our
Marae.
It has previously been established in the Environment Court that scientific modelling has supported
our assertion that there are occasions throughout the year when inversion climatic conditions
affect Matata.
Hence due to inversion conditions there have been occasions where our Marae has been affected by
the odour of fresh milk from Harry Burt’s cow shed while milking is underway.
This is a sure indication that in certain climatic conditions our Marae will be affected by odour
discharged by the Wastewater Treatment Plant and this is culturally unacceptable.
Where the Whakatane District Council’s application for a Resource Consent to discharge odour is
concerned locating the Treatment plant on the sand dunes at the Wastewater disposal area (as
originally proposed) would be more culturally acceptable.
8.5
The economic impact on Ngati Rangitihi culture.
The economic impact of the Matata Wastewater scheme on Ngati Rangitihi is culturally
unacceptable.
Matata is deprived community that in around 2008 was designated nine out of ten on the New
Zealand Deprivation Index, ten being the worst with people on fixed incomes and no jobs.
There has since been a global economic recession, food, electricity and insurance costs have
increased substantially and rates in Matata have more than doubled therefore a survey is not
needed to show that the level of deprivation in Matata is now much worse today.
Because of the high level of deprivation in Matata there has long been a trend of Ngati Rangitihi
moving away from their Marae to the cities where experience shows they soon become
disconnected from their culture.
The fear is that the combination higher rates and electricity bills due to the Matata Wastewater
Scheme will have the tendency to drive more Ngati Rangitihi out of Matata and will also have the
tendency to put more Ngati Rangitihi off returning to here to retire and this is very damaging and
weakens our culture.
10
8.6
Our health and wellbeing
Sewerage overflows are a public health hazard and are culturally unacceptable.
The level of deprivation in Matata is such that many households struggle to pay their electricity bills.
Although at present because we have septic tanks our health and wellbeing is not immediately
affected when our electricity is disconnected.
However with the proposed Matata Wastewater Scheme there is only a 24 hour reserve which
means once the electricity is disconnect in future over flows will soon occur and public health and
our well being will be quickly affected and this is culturally unacceptable.
Maketu has a pressure wastewater system and our inquiries have revealed that households there
have experienced sewerage overflows and that the fire brigade has had to be called out to clean up.
The best solution to the problem of electricity disconnections would be for the Whakatane District to
change a Vacuum Wastewater system for Matata which does not require grinder pumps.
Failing that the solution to overcoming the problem of electricity disconnections with the proposed
pressure system (suggested by the Regional Council’s Pollution Control Officer) is to install solar
panels to power the grinder pumps.
Furthermore installing Solar panels would be a fixed cost and could prove a lot less expensive for rate
payers than the unknown cost of wiring all the households in Matata for grinder pumps.
8.7
Raw sewerage leaks
Raw sewerage leaks in our environment are culturally unacceptable.
Our inquiries reveal that Engineers for a “pressure” wastewater scheme in Victoria report that
sewerage leaks can and do occur in pressure wastewater systems due to various component failures
and to the failure of the welded joint where the property connection line joins the main sewer.
The leakage of raw sewerage into our groundwater is much less culturally acceptable than the
partially treated wastewater seepage from our current septic tanks.
Our inquiries also reveal that that “Vacuum” Wastewater schemes require half the water of a
pressure Wastewater scheme.
Changing to a Vacuum Wastewater system in Matata would eliminate raw sewerage leaks and
would also save the District’s rate payers the huge cost of upgrading the Matata water supply which
only just meets the current demand.
11
8.8 Telemetry controls
The proposed Matata Wastewater Scheme does not have Telemetry Controls and this is culturally
unacceptable.
A report by Engineers for a pressure Wastewater scheme in Victoria that was installed in 2001
recommend that Telemetry control of the individual household grinder pump is necessary for
efficiency and ease of maintenance so those operating the system are able to monitor alarms with
out relying on customer feedback and to control pumps remotely for start ups and systems shut
down for maintenance.
From our cultural stand point Telemetry Controls are essential with a pressure Wastewater scheme
because they enable the remote monitory of the alarms for the grinder pumps which means
operators do not have to just rely on customer feedback to prevent overflows.
8.9
A district wide scheme
The level of sewerage contamination and dairy effluent entering our Customary Marine area is
culturally unacceptable.
Unfortunately is evident from our reading of the USR Report that the Matata wastewater disposal
area is likely to further contribute to the contamination of our Customary Marine area via the
Tarawera River.
The amount of sewerage from the Edgecumbe treatment plant and dairy farm effluent this is
entering the Tarawera River is already culturally unacceptable and the disposal Matata’s wastewater
will only add more contamination.
A review of the Regional Council Tarawera River Plan is due in eighteen months time and given the
level of contamination that is entering our Customary Marine we believe the Matata Wastewater
Scheme should be considered in the light of the upcoming review because it is clear that a district
wide wastewater scheme is called for.
9.
In conclusion
Unfortunately there are major aspects of the Whakatane District Council’s proposed Wastewater
Scheme for Matata that are culturally unacceptable as has been documented in this report.
Never the less the proposed Matata Wastewater scheme could be made more culturally acceptable
if the Whakatane District Council were to amend their Resource Consent application as follows:

By including the use of Ground Penetrating Radar in the Resource Consent Application to locate
the bones of our ancestors buried the Wastewater disposal area so they can be safely removed
before any ground begins; and
12

By the Whakatane District Council employing members of the Tangihia Hapu under the
“Accidental Discovery Protocol” to supervise of our ancestors bones and any Archaeological
Artefacts when they are discovered by GPR or by accident; and

By the Whakatane District Council altering the reticulation of Matata to avoid desecrating the
Wahi Tapu sites identified in this report; and

Preferably by the Whakatane District Council changing to a more culturally acceptable “Vacuum”
Wastewater scheme for Matata that does not require grinder pumps; and

By installing solar panels to power the grinder pumps if the Whakatane district Council does not
change to the much more culturally acceptable Vacuum Wastewater system; and

By the Whakatane District Council relocating the Sewerage Treatment plant to a more culturally
acceptable location on the sand dunes at the Wastewater disposal area as was originally
proposed by Council Engineers; and

By the Whakatane District Council treating the wastewater with UV light to kill pathogens in
order to make its disposal in our environment more culturally acceptable.
This Cultural Impact Assessment Report produced by Tangihia Consultants and Associates Limited on
the proposed Matata Wastewater scheme will be published having been endorsed by the Tangihia
Hapu.
Please see attachment marked APPENDIX “A” for the responses by the Whakatane District
Council to the ways the Cultural impact of the Matata Wastewater Scheme could be lessened (listed
under “Conclusion” on page12/13) along with our comments and our submissions on the
“Conditions of Consent” for the Consent Authority.
Tangihia Consultants and Associates Ltd.
11 Pakeha Street,
RD4 Matata,
Whakatane 3194
Phone (07)3222075
Email: joos@xtra.co.nz
13
14
Appendix “A” Conditions of Consent
Our Submissions to the Consent Authority on the “Conditions of Consent” that will
lessen the Cultural Impact of the Matata Wastewater Scheme as listed on pages 12/13 of
the Matata Wastewater Cultural Impact Assessment produced by Tangihia Consultants
and Associates Ltd.
1
By including the use of Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) in the Resource Consent
Application to locate the bones of our ancestors buried the Wastewater disposal
area so they can be safely removed before any ground begins; and
1.1
WDC Engineers commented:
“The Council has commissioned Dr Lynda Walters to carry Archaeological Assessment of all sites
indicated for localisation of the scheme infrastructure. Dr Lynda Walters and Dr Rachel Darmody
from NZ Historic Places Trust were consulted on the use of the GPR and both of them did not
recommend its use but the Council will contact Dr David Nobes from Canterbury University to
discuss with him the use of Radar in Matatā scheme investigation and to seek his opinion on the
approach”.
1.2
Our response to WDC:
Disposing of Wastewater in an area where we believe the bones of our ancestors are located is
culturally offensive and culturally unacceptable.
From our experience the use of Ground penetrating Radar (GPR) has been useful to locate human
remains in shallow graves in sand.
The Wastewater disposal area is on sand dunes and any graves there are likely to be shallow hence
our request that the Wastewater area be scanned for human remains so they can be removed before
any works in the area begin; and therefore:
1.3
Our submission to the Consent Authority is that GPR scanning of the
Wastewater disposal area be imposed as a Condition of Consent in application
# 67708.
15
2
By the Whakatane District Council employing members of the Tangihia Hapu to
remove the bones of our ancestors and any Archaeological Artefacts when they are
discovered by GPR or by accident; and
2.1
WDC Engineers commented:
“The Whakatane District Council must comply with the Historic Places Act. That may mean that
Tangihia hapu are not permitted to simply uplift or remove such items, as is suggested by the
content of the Tangihia CIA.”
“If any intact archaeological material is encountered during earthworks all disturbance of the site
must cease until such time as an archaeological authority has been obtained from the Historic Places
Trust. Dr Lynda Walters has been commissioned to carry out archaeological assessment to assist in
determining the likelihood of such material being encountered and whether an archaeological
authority is required.”
“The Tangihia CIA is asserting that there is a high likelihood of archaeological material (burials and
artefacts) being present in the project area, and is seeking geo-physical survey in order to identify
where such sites are, so that the items can be dug up and removed prior to project earthworks. If
the geo-physical survey does identify 'anomalies', that are suspected or proven to be archaeological
sites, they cannot be disturbed without a prior authority from the Historic Places Trust.”
“Regardless of the project ADP as agreed with Iwi, if we encounter intact archaeological features
(including koiwi or artefacts if they have an intact archaeological context), we will have to comply
with the Historic Places Act will be required.”
“WDC was provided with Accidental Discovery Protocol (ADP) by iwi and will add Raupatu Trust to
the list of iwi that will be contacted when koiwi or taonga are discovered”.
2.2
Our Response to WDC:
In the first instance any human remains mapped by GPR or discovered accidently would immediately
fall under the jurisdiction of the New Zealand Police Force. When any human remains or
Archaeological Artefacts are discovered by GPR or by accident it will be necessary to conform to the
relevant provisions of Historic Places Act.
However the advent of GPR mapping means it is no longer appropriate for the Whakatane District
Council to simply rely solely on accidental discovery of human remains or archaeological artefacts
when disturbing soil.
Hence it is now up to the Hapu of the district to provide the Whakatane District Council a new
“discovery protocol” incorporating “GPR scanning” of all areas where ground works are to take
place; and therefore:.
2.3
Our submission to the Consent Authority is that a new “Discovery Protocol”
incorporating GPR scanning in the first instance is to be imposed as a Condition
of Consent in application # 67708.
16
3
By the Whakatane District Council altering the reticulation of Matata to avoid
desecrating the Wahi Tapu sites identified in this report; and
3.1
WDC Engineers commented:
“The WDC will alter pipe trenches as far as possible to avoid close proximity of Wahi Tapu sites while
still being able to provide connection to houses in the Wahi Tapu sites vicinity.”
3.2
Our Response to WDC:
Locating mains as far away as possible to avoid Wahi Tapu in consultation with the Tangihia Hapu is
totally important to reduce the cultural impact of the Matata Wastewater scheme.
Thrusting will destroy or damage human remains and archaeological artefacts which is why GPR
scanning of the area where the mains are to be laid around Wahi Tapu areas needs to be undertaken
as a precaution.
The only way to avoid desecrating the Whai Tapu area on the corner of St John Street and Arawa
Street would be to lay the sewer main above ground on the Northern side of Arawa Street at least as
far towards Whakatane as the Eastern boundary of the Rangitihi Cemetery at the Rangitihi Marae.
Laying the Sewer main above ground will avoid desecrating the bone washing and the bone scraping
area Wahi Tapu area that is located below the Rangitihi Marae Cemetery; and therefore:
3.3
Our submission to the Consent Authority that sewer mains are to be located as
far away as possible from Wahi Tapu and above ground from the end of Mair
Street East at far as the Eastern boundary of the Cemetery at the Rangitihi Marae
be imposed as a Condition of Consent in Application #67708.
17
4
Preferably by the Whakatane District Council changing to a more culturally
acceptable “Vacuum” Wastewater scheme for Matata that does not require
grinder pumps; and
4.1
WDC Engineers Commented:
“WDC have considered the vacuum system as one of conveyance options for Matatā. The low
pressure system was chosen on the basis of reticulation costs, proven record track in New Zealand
ease of maintenance, access to service and spare parts”.
4.2
Our Response to WDC:
We do not accept the WDC assertion that the proposed “pressure” type wastewater scheme is
suitable for Matata.
Matata residents have experienced the 1987 Edgecumbe Earthquake Disaster and the 2005 Matata
Flood Disaster and in both Civil Emergencies our electricity in Matata was off for days.
Our Rangitihi Marae was then and still is the designated Civil Defence facility catering for our
population of six hundred people and the problem with the proposed “pressure” type Wastewater
system is that in an emergency without electricity raw sewerage will soon start overflowing at our
Marae and this is totally unacceptable.
Likewise with the “pressure” type Wastewater system the impact of such disasters in future will be
very much worse for Matata residents because with only a twenty four hour reserve sewerage
overflows will quickly occur at our homes creating a wide spread public health hazard throughout the
Town.
Hence we are emphatic that Matata must have a “Vacuum” type wastewater scheme which only
requires a single standby generator to power the entire system in an emergency situation.
Furthermore the proposed “pressure” type wastewater system for Matata is not suitable because the
extreme deprivation level in Matata means many rate payers struggle to pay their electricity bills
which means a Wastewater System that requires household electricity 24/7 to power a grinder pump
is not appropriate.
If WDC require a proven track record then Kawakawa Bay has a “Vacuum” type Wastewater scheme
and there are other examples available just across the Tasman so there are plenty of examples that
the Whakatane District Council Engineers could investigate; and therefore:
4.4
Our submission to the Consent Authority is that a “Vacuum” type Wastewater
Scheme be imposed as a Condition of Consent in Application #67708.
18
5
By installing solar panels to power the grinder pumps if the Whakatane district
Council does not change to the much more culturally acceptable Vacuum
Wastewater system; and
5.1
WDC Engineers commented:
“Council has investigated with grinder pump suppliers on the feasibility to use solar panels as means
of power supply. The use of solar panels would require a host of additional equipment (batteries,
inventers) and all this would need to be burglar proofed. The main issue with the use of solar panels
is providing enough battery storage capacity to cater for longer periods without sun and protecting
batteries from overheating during sunny days, especially if pump is not used. To really cater for this,
solar panels would need to be incorporated in the grid to sell not needed power. Such design could
be used in green solution, but then it would become different project from the scheme intended to
remove wastewater from properties to treat it and dispose of. If Solar panels are used to provide
power for the household and household appliances the grinder pump can be connected to house
wiring.”
“The Council has a hardship fund that can be applied to by people facing hardship and not being able
to pay their rates.”
5.2
Our Response to WDC:
The WDC hardship fund is only for rate payers.
Many Matata residents who struggle to pay their electricity bills are tenants, not rate payers and
therefore the WDC hardship fund is not available to them.
Should the WDC proceed with the proposed “pressure” type Wastewater Scheme then it is
imperative for public health that the electricity bills for Matata Residents are guaranteed by the
WDC.
Furthermore we make the point that Solar panels and the ancillary equipment would remain WDC
property and therefore would be insured by WDC against theft. In any case any theft of WDC
property would be a matter for the Police; and therefore:
5.3
Our Submission to the Consent Authority is that if a “pressure” type
Wastewater Scheme is installed then solar powered grinder pumps are to be
imposed as a Condition of Consent in Application # 67708;
Failing that:
If solar power for the grinder pumps is not going to be stalled then the Whakatane
District Council has to guarantee the Electricity bills of all Matata electricity
consumers as a Condition of Consent in Application # 67708.
19
6 By the Whakatāne District Council relocating the Sewerage Treatment plant to a more
culturally acceptable location on the sand dunes at the Wastewater disposal area as
was originally proposed by Council Engineers; and
6.1
WDC Engineers commented:
“The location of Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on dunes east of Tarawera River was
considered as one of initial options. When the Matatā site was offered to Council to localise WWTP
the option analysis and risk analysis were undertaken and the Matatā site was chosen as the best
option for localisation of WWTP.”
6.2
Our Response to WDC:
Locating the Wastewater Treatment Plant on the Oniao site is culturally offensive and unacceptable
due to the risk of odour affecting our Rangitihi Marae particularly when inversion conditions prevail.
While the Wastewater disposal area is Tapu never the less locating the Wastewater Treatment Plant
there would be more culturally acceptable as long as the area was scanned with GPR and any human
remains and Archaeological artefacts were removed first; and therefore:
6.3 Our submission to the Consent Authority is that the Wastewater Treatment Plant is
to be located at the “Wastewater Disposal area by imposed as a Condition of
Consent in Application #67708.
7 By the Whakatane District Council treating the wastewater with UV light to kill
pathogens in order to make its disposal in our environment more culturally acceptable.
7.1
WDC Engineers commented:
“The design of WWTP will allow for UV treatment of wastewater if the level of treatment proves
insufficient or consent conditions are revised and higher level of treatment is required. UV
treatment unit will not be a part of initially constructed treatment plant if the level of wastewater
treatment proves to be complying with consent conditions. This is to limit capital and operational
costs of WWTP.”
20
7.2
Our Response to WDC:
The disposal of only partially treated effluent in our environment is culturally unacceptable
when the technology is available to treat it with Ultraviolet Light to kill the pathogens. The
extra capital investment of only two hundred thousand dollars maximum in a multi-million
dollar Wastewater scheme by comparison is regarded by many in Matata as being
infinitesimal; and therefore:
7.3
Our submission to the Consent Authority is that the installation of Ultraviolet
Light Treatment be imposed as a Condition of Consent in Application #67708.
8.
The proposed Matata Wastewater Scheme does not have Telemetry Controls and
this is culturally unacceptable.
8.1
WDC Engineers Commented:
“The design of the reticulation system will allow for addition of telemetry if it proves to be necessary
for the efficient operation. Matatā wastewater scheme is a small one and the Council based its
decision of not to include telemetry, on the experience from operation of other small schemes, the
closest on in Maketū. This is capital and operational cost saving decision supported by evidence that
such scheme can be operated efficiently without telemetry.”
8.2
Our response to WDC:
Telemetry monitoring of household grinder pumps is essential to prevent raw sewerage over flows
creating a public health hazard.
Simply relying on customer feedback has proved unreliable with raw sewerage over flows occurring
at Maketu and in the State of Victoria where a “pressure” type Wastewater Scheme was installed in
2001; and therefore:.
8.3
Our Submission to the Consent Authority is that If is Matata is to have the
“pressure” type Wastewater Scheme proposed then Telemetry Control and
Monitoring of household grinder pumps is to be imposed as a Condition of
Consent in Application #67708.
21
Tangihia Consultants and Associates Ltd
11 Pakeha Street
RD 4 Matata
Whakatane 3194
Phone (07) 3222075
Email: joos@xtra.co.nz
Web site www.rangitihi.com
22