Uploaded July 2024 | Updated September 2026, 1 week ago
It is an old landscape, a place of shadows and folded headlands on the southern coast of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū (Banks Peninsula).
Here, some time in the mid-1850s, Ngāti Irakehu kaumātua Heremaia Mautai, of the people of Wairewa (Little River), cut the belt of one of the first sawmills that would soon spread across the forested land.
The loggers fled, “but they came back,” says descendant Robin Wybrow (Waitaha/Kāti Māmoe/Kāti Kuri/Ngāi Tahu), “and in a few short years they stripped the catchment.”
The deforestation of the peninsula, he says, “destroyed the soul of the people.”
Now, through a ten-year partnership between Wairewa Rūnanga and Orion New Zealand and an unexpected gift of land from reclusive farmer Jim Wright, Mautai’s goal to protect the forest will be revived with the replanting of some 240-300 hectares in native trees.
When Europeans first settled on Banks Peninsula in the 1830s, it was home to a dense tract of primeval podocarp forest including tōtara, mataī and kahikatea.
For Māori, says Wybrow, “the forests were our people’s playground, their pantry, their cathedral.”
That cathedral was about to be decimated.
Milling began in the 1840s by European mariners settling in the numerous bays, but the arrival of Canterbury Association settlers from the 1850s saw timber mills springing up across the region.
By 1880, there were 26 sawmills on the peninsula. Within two decades, this number had almost doubled. By the end of the century, 99% of the once-forested peninsula had been felled, supplying the burgeoning settler population in Christchurch and further afield.
The deforestation and the burning of what remained gave Little River the name of the “Valley of Fires”.
With the forest largely gone, the land was given over to cocksfoot, dairy, beef and sheep farming.
About a dozen indigenous bird species were driven to extinction, others retreated to remote wooded gullies. Runoff from the cleared hillsides turned Te Roto o Wairewa/Lake Forsyth, once an abundant source of tuna (eels) and flatfish, into a reservoir of phosphate-rich sludge.
By this time, the people of Wairewa, once kaitiaki of thousands of hectares of land from Kaitōrete Spit to Akaroa Harbour and all the southern bays between, were living on uneconomic reserves isolated from their mahinga kai. Despite ongoing dispute over three purported land purchases, land had been sold or leased to settlers. Following the arrival of Walter Mantell, Commissioner for Extinguishing Native Titles, in the 1840s, the rūnanga, says Wybrow, “was left with 400 acres at the end of the day, which was not enough to sustain our people.”
Local Ngāi Tahu were forced into the settler economy. Some incurred debt; others left. “It broke the whole social fabric. Time doesn't heal intergenerational trauma. It just compounds.”
Wybrow was in his 30s when he learned he had Māori ancestry and was part of the Wairewa Rūnanga of Ngāi Tahu.
“It gave me a sense of belonging at that stage that I’d never had before, but what I belonged to, I didn't understand.”
For nearly 15 years he served as chair of Wairewa Rūnanga, the administrative council of the hapū of Ngāti Irakehu and Ngāti Makō. It was during this time that he sought the approval of Jim Wright, a reclusive Pākehā farmer, to protect a pā site on his property in Tumbledown Bay/Te Kāio.
Wright gave his approval, often watching the restoration work from horseback at the top of the hill.
After Wright died, Wybrow received a call from his lawyer – “Lo and behold, he left his whole farm to us.”
Wright left over 440 hectares of land, from Magnet Bay/Makara to Tumbledown Bay/Te Kāio. “It was land coming back to us,” says Wybrow, “and Jim Wright did know that.”
The land is now held in a trust, “and we are in the process of recloaking”, says Wybrow.
Already 45,000 trees have been planted, with the same number expected to be planted this coming season. The project will provide income from carbon credits but for Wybrow, the focus is on that connection to whenua and identity that drove Mautai so many generations ago.
“He worked so hard to protect the land and the people, and we’re still trying to do that in lots of respects.”
By Sally Blundell
Attributions:
Wairewa Marae
Photo Credits:
Macmillan Brown Library, University of Canterbury
Old Native Bush - Little River Collection: 1825 - 1898
Creator: Mountfort, Benjamin Woolfield
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
Young Walter Mantell portrait: 1856
Baugniet, Charles, 1814-1886 Ref: C-035-004
Photos found in ‘Picturing the Peninsula’ by Gordon Ogilvie
York Steam Sawmill - Pigeon Bay: 1878 Murray Thacker
Bulls drag log - Hickory Bay: 1890s John Moore
Totara log - 1900s John Moore
All courtesy of the Macmillan Brown Library, University of Canterbury
Little River 1860s. Mountfort Collection
Wairewa 1870: Mountfort Collection
Mt Sinclair tramper poses: 1920s WA taylor
Maori Whare with Forsyth Mill behind: Mountfort Collection
It is an old landscape, a place of shadows and folded headlands on the southern coast of Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū (Banks Peninsula).
Here, some time in the mid-1850s, Ngāti Irakehu kaumātua Heremaia Mautai, of the people of Wairewa (Little River), cut the belt of one of the first sawmills that would soon spread across the forested land.
The loggers fled, “but they came back,” says descendant Robin Wybrow (Waitaha/Kāti Māmoe/Kāti Kuri/Ngāi Tahu), “and in a few short years they stripped the catchment.”
The deforestation of the peninsula, he says, “destroyed the soul of the people.”
Now, through a ten-year partnership between Wairewa Rūnanga and Orion New Zealand and an unexpected gift of land from reclusive farmer Jim Wright, Mautai’s goal to protect the forest will be revived with the replanting of some 240-300 hectares in native trees.
When Europeans first settled on Banks Peninsula in the 1830s, it was home to a dense tract of primeval podocarp forest including tōtara, mataī and kahikatea.
For Māori, says Wybrow, “the forests were our people’s playground, their pantry, their cathedral.”
That cathedral was about to be decimated.
Milling began in the 1840s by European mariners settling in the numerous bays, but the arrival of Canterbury Association settlers from the 1850s saw timber mills springing up across the region.
By 1880, there were 26 sawmills on the peninsula. Within two decades, this number had almost doubled. By the end of the century, 99% of the once-forested peninsula had been felled, supplying the burgeoning settler population in Christchurch and further afield.
The deforestation and the burning of what remained gave Little River the name of the “Valley of Fires”.
With the forest largely gone, the land was given over to cocksfoot, dairy, beef and sheep farming.
About a dozen indigenous bird species were driven to extinction, others retreated to remote wooded gullies. Runoff from the cleared hillsides turned Te Roto o Wairewa/Lake Forsyth, once an abundant source of tuna (eels) and flatfish, into a reservoir of phosphate-rich sludge.
By this time, the people of Wairewa, once kaitiaki of thousands of hectares of land from Kaitōrete Spit to Akaroa Harbour and all the southern bays between, were living on uneconomic reserves isolated from their mahinga kai. Despite ongoing dispute over three purported land purchases, land had been sold or leased to settlers. Following the arrival of Walter Mantell, Commissioner for Extinguishing Native Titles, in the 1840s, the rūnanga, says Wybrow, “was left with 400 acres at the end of the day, which was not enough to sustain our people.”
Local Ngāi Tahu were forced into the settler economy. Some incurred debt; others left. “It broke the whole social fabric. Time doesn't heal intergenerational trauma. It just compounds.”
Wybrow was in his 30s when he learned he had Māori ancestry and was part of the Wairewa Rūnanga of Ngāi Tahu.
“It gave me a sense of belonging at that stage that I’d never had before, but what I belonged to, I didn't understand.”
For nearly 15 years he served as chair of Wairewa Rūnanga, the administrative council of the hapū of Ngāti Irakehu and Ngāti Makō. It was during this time that he sought the approval of Jim Wright, a reclusive Pākehā farmer, to protect a pā site on his property in Tumbledown Bay/Te Kāio.
Wright gave his approval, often watching the restoration work from horseback at the top of the hill.
After Wright died, Wybrow received a call from his lawyer – “Lo and behold, he left his whole farm to us.”
Wright left over 440 hectares of land, from Magnet Bay/Makara to Tumbledown Bay/Te Kāio. “It was land coming back to us,” says Wybrow, “and Jim Wright did know that.”
The land is now held in a trust, “and we are in the process of recloaking”, says Wybrow.
Already 45,000 trees have been planted, with the same number expected to be planted this coming season. The project will provide income from carbon credits but for Wybrow, the focus is on that connection to whenua and identity that drove Mautai so many generations ago.
“He worked so hard to protect the land and the people, and we’re still trying to do that in lots of respects.”
By Sally Blundell
Attributions:
Wairewa Marae
Photo Credits:
Macmillan Brown Library, University of Canterbury
Old Native Bush - Little River Collection: 1825 - 1898
Creator: Mountfort, Benjamin Woolfield
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
Young Walter Mantell portrait: 1856
Baugniet, Charles, 1814-1886 Ref: C-035-004
Photos found in ‘Picturing the Peninsula’ by Gordon Ogilvie
York Steam Sawmill - Pigeon Bay: 1878 Murray Thacker
Bulls drag log - Hickory Bay: 1890s John Moore
Totara log - 1900s John Moore
All courtesy of the Macmillan Brown Library, University of Canterbury
Little River 1860s. Mountfort Collection
Wairewa 1870: Mountfort Collection
Mt Sinclair tramper poses: 1920s WA taylor
Maori Whare with Forsyth Mill behind: Mountfort Collection





![Lunch with the candidates
Roald Dahl wrote, ‘Somewhere inside each of us is the power to change the world’. He may have been right, but not many of us have the motivation, nor the guts, to step up and steer the ship. Those running for Christchurch City mayor in the upcoming local elections certainly do, and Frank Film decided to get to know the frontrunners.
At first glance, Phil Mauger and David Meates, the two main contenders for the mayoral seat, are fairly similar. They’re both middle-aged white men. But, whilst there may be no points for diversity in this election, the two candidates are in fact chalk and cheese in character. We joined both Phil and David while they cooked us lunch, and then visited their childhood homes. Phil, 64, who was brought up in North Brighton and lives in Fendalton, made souvlaki. He was under the close supervision of his wife, Chrissie, who watched with some trepidation. “He doesn’t cook often,” Chrissie said, and helped him open the bag of wraps.
Phil explained that they’ve been in their family home for 20 years. “It’s quite big, but we’ve got nine grandchildren, eight of which are under the age of nine,” he said. Phil is a Christchurch city councillor for the Burwood ward, and apart from his work as a city councillor, has spent all of his life working in and running the family business, Maugers Contracting Ltd. He left school in the sixth form. When asked why he was running for mayor, Phil said it’s because he knows he can make a difference. “We’ve got to make sure that [the grandkids] have got a good place to live.”
David, 61, who was brought up in Beckenham, made scrambled eggs on fresh sourdough. “I’m a really basic sort of cook, and really like pretty plain food,” he explained. David cooked on his own at his daughter’s house in Bishopdale as his place was getting renovated. “[I come from] a family of ten kids - I’ve got eight sisters, and I learnt my place very early on in life,” said David, who has a Bachelors in Agricultural Science. He has worked as Chief Executive of both the Canterbury District Health Board (South Island’s largest employer) and the West Coast District Health Board, and said he’s running for mayor after being approached by a range of people looking for a different style of leadership. “That’s in terms of listening and working with communities to solve complex problems,” David explained.
And what about the main issues concerning the people of Christchurch? Over lunch, we peppered each with some quick-fire questions. Their responses proved to be a spotlight on the differences between them. Climate change - are we moving fast enough? “Yes, I think we are, we’ve got the climate emergency, but we’ve got to do things,” said Phil, who’s made a name for himself (namely by going out with his digger and digging a trench without permission in 2020) for ‘getting things done’. “Since then I’ve learnt quite a lot about process,” Phil said of the trench-digging. “If I was doing it again I’d be working hard with council staff to get that done.”
“No,” said David in response to the climate change question, “If this is an emergency we’re not moving particularly quickly.” Last book they read? For Phil, a few pages of Winning Elections by Ronald Faucheux. For David, Calling Bullshit by Carl Bergstrom and Jevin West, about the misuse of data, and Who rules the world by Noam Chomsky. “It’s a terrifying read,” said David, who has only earlier this year broken his silence about his reasons for leaving Canterbury DHB in 2020 after 10 years as chief executive. “We were going to need to make trade-offs about cutting services, and to put it simply I was just not prepared to,” he said.
Cycleways? David was a yes - but also said there are some which aren’t working, and we need to look at why. Phil gave a yes, too, but not to the amount of money we’re spending on them. Both had ridden their bikes recently: Phil on his electric one a couple of months ago, David citing himself as a regular cyclist.
In response to the results of a recent resident survey, which showed council approval rates were the lowest they’d been in 15 years, their differences were again apparent through their strategies for improvement. David brought up his long history of working with teams. “If you can create the right culture and the right environment, it’s amazing what organisations are able to do,” he said. For Phil, the plan if he is elected is to get out in amongst the people at least once a fortnight.
Both identify as Christian; David goes to church ‘periodically’, Phil, ‘not a lot’. Both hope to be remembered as neither right nor left leaning, with David citing experience working with both. We then asked each what power the mayor had. “One vote,” said Phil, “But it’s up to the mayor to get everyone pulling the rope in the same direction.” For David, the mayor represents the moral authority of the community. “In terms of helping set the tone for how a group of councillors need to work and operate,” he said. Lunch with the candidates](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/JoxoSy1A5Y4/mqdefault.jpg)



![Does New Zealand need a Waste-to-Energy plant?
SIRRL director Paul Taylor says he got behind the idea of a Waste-to-Energy plant
because, “as a farmer, I’m a caretaker of the land.”
Project Kea is an initiative from South Island Resource Recovery Limited (SIRRL) to
build the first Waste-to-Energy plant in New Zealand. The proposed site for the plant is
near the Glenavy township in Waimate.
“Waste-to-Energy is about the conversion of non-recyclable materials into various
practical forms of energy,” Taylor explains. It sounds appealing: instead of shoving New
Zealanders’ waste into landfill, such a plant could burn our waste at high temperatures,
producing valuable energy.
So why are more than 150 Waimate locals against SIRRL’s proposed Waste-to-Energy
plant?
“There is no doubt that, in terms of absolute risk, this plant raises the stakes,” says Dr.
Crispin Langston, a Waimate GP.
“In South London, around the Edmonton plant (also known as Edmonton EcoPark),
there’s an increased incidence of cancers and birth defects, and these have been
attributed to the plant.” Greenpeace have previously staged protests at the Edmonton
plant to “stop the facility emitting cancer causing chemicals.”
But according to Taylor, Project Kea will incorporate new technology which is much
safer than older technologies. “Dioxins were a major issue. As I understand it: now,
dioxins are handled very comfortably within the processing system.”
“My concern,” replies Langston, “is that it’s technology. And technologies always fail at
some point.”
“Why have they chosen Waimate?” Robert Ireland – artist and spokesperson for Why
Waste Waimate – asks. “They want to truck the waste from all around the South Island,
mostly from Christchurch, incinerate it, and truck the residue ash away again. It’ll be
134 heavy truck and trailer movements per day.”
Taylor explains: “[Waimate is] an area that’s centrally located to waste throughout the
South Island. It’s intended that we will move upwards of 50% by rail, if possible.”
In March 2023, members of Why Waste Waimate took to the streets to protest the
proposed plant.
“Since SIRRL have come here and pitched their proposal, they haven’t really
acknowledged us,” says Ireland.
“They were not readily engaging with the local community,” agrees Langston. “So the
local doctors, five of us, got together and wrote an open letter [about health risks of the
proposed plant].”
“We went to discuss the project initially,” Taylor says. “We didn’t have a piece of land at
that stage, and we hadn’t prepared all of our technical reports. That process took a long
time, so it was a long time before we returned to the community.”
“At one of the meetings,” Ireland says, “Mr. Taylor was asked: If the Waimate community
showed that we didn’t want the incinerator, would [SIRRL] leave town? And his
response was: ‘They’ll get to like it.’”
Langston believes that New Zealand does not have a severe enough waste crisis to
require building an incinerator. “There are countries that have a true waste crisis,
where they have to send waste offshore. But that’s not the case here.”
Niki Bould, a Dunedin-based sustainability consultant and waste expert, agrees. “We do
need to make change, in terms of what we’re all buying, consuming and throwing away.
But it is changing. I’ve been working in this space for years, and I can see that.”
Bould points to Waimate’s four-bin system as an example of Kiwi councils working hard
to encourage recycling and reduce residual waste.
Taylor acknowledges the efforts being made to increase recycling. But, he says, there
will always be residual waste, “albeit in smaller volumes,” and the question is what to do
with it.
“We do not have the population in New Zealand to sustain massive burning machines,”
says Bould. “To keep the energy coming [out of the plant], we would have to feed it.
“Where are we going to get all that waste from? It just means we’re going to have to
encourage people to waste, which is the opposite of what we’re trying to do.”
In late 2022, SIRRL applied for resource consent for the Project Kea waste-to-energy
plant. They were rejected twice due to a lack of environmental and cultural impact
information. They have since appealed, and, on May 15, it was decided that their
application will enter the system.
So: how do Taylor and Ireland summarise their thoughts about Project Kea?
“I’m pretty passionate about this,” says Taylor of his company’s initiative. “I think it’s
the right thing for New Zealand.”
“We need to be designing waste out of our lives,” says Robert Ireland. “Not creating
another market for it.”
Credits:
Producer/Director: Gerard Smyth
Editor: Tracey Jury
Researcher/Writer: Nicole Phillipson
Production Manager: Jo Ffitch
Post-Production Coordinator: Andy Johnson
Sound Design and Mix: Chris Sinclair
Attributions:
Architect’s drawings of proposed plant provided by SIRRL
LondonWaste EcoPark photograph by John Davies, CC BY-SA 2.0
“Action at Edmonton Incinerator in London” photograph © Greenpeace / Nick Cobbing Does New Zealand need a Waste-to-Energy plant?](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Kj7JDVrhahI/mqdefault.jpg)
