The most valuable time spent in May

On Thursday May 17, dad and I travelled to Hamilton to support our written submissions to the Department of Conservation regarding the draft Waikato Conservation Management Strategy (CMS). I talked about it in a post at the time. Andy had also spoken to his submission a few days later and commented that he felt his comments were well received.

We'd received a good audience by the panel, and I had left feeling confident that we and other hut custodians in the swamp would be able to retain our lodgings; even if more stringent regulations were to be imposed.

Having arrived back from family holiday to Hawaii, I was confronted with something like 480 emails accrued in a space of 9 days. Having distilled them down to a list of things that required attention (54 emails) and ditched the rest my eyes came to rest on one from DOC. I put it to one side and returned to it later in the day. A quick eyeball showed a letter offering thanks for having made a submission, as well as a link to DOC's response to submissions. 168 individual written submissions were made, although I don't know how many were supported verbally before the panel.

Within our area's users, it looks as though there were half a dozen submissions from individuals as well as our user group (Upper Piako Wetland Management Association) with the same central vein - retention of the areas duck huts (shanties) for reasons of historical significance, low environmental impact and for more practical reasons of safety of area users.

It had earlier seemed clear that DOC sought removal of structures (not hides or maimais) from the Kopuatai wetland, however this may not have been the intent. Either way, the amended draft strategy makes the following concessions:

2.5.13 Manage authorised51 private accommodation, including authorised private huts (duck huts) and encampments, on public conservation land within this Place in accordance with Policies 3.10.2 to 3.10.7 in Part Three, and the following criteria:

a)   must be available for public use outside the game bird hunting season
b) must comply with local authority building requirements;
c) must not be rebuilt if destroyed or falls into a substantial state of disrepair;
d) must not build ancillary structures, such as storage sheds, adjacent to existing
  huts; and
e) non-compliant structures and buildings will be removed. [939, 1178]

This policy is infinitely better than complete removal of the huts, and to my mind is a triumph for the partnership between DOC and the user group. The onus is now well and truly on the hut custodians to play their part - we will.That half day in May, spent talking to DOC's CMS panel, is in my mind the most valuable investment in time that could have been made. I think my old grand pop (a man of immense mana and one of the original hut custodians, now resting in a better place) would look down and give us all a pat on the back and say "well done men".