If I wi and hapu had the chance to review existing information on the Historic Places Trust register and develop their own information systems, they could actively maintain their knowledge of place. By accessing archaeological surveys and databases, iwi and hapu would then conduct their own research, assess their own areas of significance and manage their findings according to their own unique needs. Nga Whenua Rahui and Matauranga Kura Taiao with direct line funding to the Minister of Conservation could then assist Maori to manage their own heritage ! significance within cultural landscape. In exploring the advantages for resident iwi or hapu holding all archaeological and heritage information about their cultural landscape, this helps over come worries about who gets to manage both unknown and unregistered, or privately-owned heritage sites in adjacent or neighbouring lands, waterways and wetlands.
Chapter Two noted how ancestors of Ngati Raukawa and affiliates of Ngati Tukorehe (including Ngati Wehiwehi as son ofKauwhata, and nephew ofTukorehe) came to occupy and utilise the coast and lands in extended groups of whanau and hapu, under a system of interlocking and overlapping usufructuary rights. Contemporary rights from the coast to the mountains still continue within the concept of ahi ka or ahi ka roa- the principle
31 Reported back to the HOllse by the Local Government and Environment Select Committee in 2004. 32 Spiritual, cultural, human and ecological values.
33 Raewyn Peart, 2004,A Place to Stand: the protrction o{New Zealand's natural and cultural landscape, Environmental Defence Society Incorporated Landscape Report, Executive Summary, Auckland, 17.
1 5 8 H EI W H ENUA O RA
of keeping the home fires burning on land, the metaphor that symbolises long-standing occupation, aligned with the right to determine what should happen in tribal regions. An ahi ka roa landscape-based archaeological programme of assessment investigates all
inter-relationships between physical evidence, cultural memory and identity. This is rather than the usual isolated pockets of evidence approach employed by most archaeologists. Such an interrelated landscape approach avoids the problems that arise when development is proposed and assessment turns up previously undiscovered evidence.34 An ahi ka roa approach shifts the current nature of archaeological recording where heritage areas or cultural values are often thought of as discrete, defined places in the ground, able to be quantified in square metres where development can take place around them. This thinking results in relationships amongst sites being damaged or destroyed. This prevailing form of assessment contributes to a loss of evidence about the way people lived and interacted with resources within landscape. Conversely, another approach often preferred by coastal land developers (seeking to speed sanction for peri-urban developments) has been to consult with Maori individuals rather than groups mandated by consensus. This significantly impedes protection of ongoing ahi ka significance in coastal dune land systems.
This chapter has outlined the considerable shortfalls in protective policy and practice over time to physically care for iwi and hapu values and actual areas within ancestral landscape. The ahi ka roa approach for the coastal area works alongside another strategy referred to as the 'silent file' project. This project visually maps recollections, context and encounters with known wahi tapu as set aside from common usage and other areas in cultural landscape. The 'silent file' mapping project uses digital mapping technology to include associated layers of ecological and hydrological importance. The ecological pilot projects underway well recognise Maori cultural identity and wellbeing as bound by vital relationships with lands and healthy ecosystems, therefore the maps encompass the goals ofMaori cultural determination over the environment.
To some informants there are both known wahi tapu and 'yet to be' known areas in the coastal dune lands region. The known sites are noted as urupa as burial grounds or where fighting chiefs were interred, pa or papa kainga as original sites of fortified and unfortified occupation, and as kauwhanga-a-riri where skirmishes or battles took place. Other burial areas in dune systems have been marked by stands of tI kouka. Other areas of significance are ahu-otaota as well-used middens or sites of shellfish harvest. Before the pine forest was grown around the Tirotirowhetu site, the midden mounds were recalled as creating
34 Soureed from the Tirotirowhetu, Ohau River proposal 2007 for assessment by Susan Forbes of Kotuku Consultancy Ltd, Titahi Bay, near Wellington. She is a leading archaeologist who works with iwi and hapu to actively support ahi ka models oflandseape assessment. Her practice well understands the complex human, ecological and cultural memory interrelationships that are present within coastal landscapes in Horowhenua that require urgent protection.
C H A P T E R F I V E 1 5 9
a remarkable spectacle when they glimmered against pale sands In the summer sun. Other significant areas within the wider coastal area include sites as places of spiritual propitiation.35 As part of the 'silent file' strategy more archaeological surveys will collate information utilising archaeological methods carried out alongside kaumatua and active kaitiaki participating in the process. If these activities are to at