Iwi ban on duck shooters takes new twist

Print

Thu, 18 Mar 2010 5:58p.m.

DoC support the ban saying it is in place to protect kokupu - a type of weed - not ducks

DoC support the ban saying it is in place to protect kokupu - a type of weed - not ducks

By Patrick Gower

The Maori ban on duck shooting at two Wellington lakes took a new twist today, with iwi and the Department of Conservation giving different stories about what's behind it.

Prime Minister John Key is demanding the issue be sorted out immediately, and tonight, one MP says he's trying to broker a deal.

After 3 News revealed the ban last night, the iwi justified it by saying the shooters are a threat to the rare large kokupu.

“Duck shooters aren't allowed to shoot anything that isn't flying - well I’ve never seen a flying kokupu,” says Murray Williams, an expert in wetlands ecology.

“It doesn't make any biological sense at all.”

Another reason the iwi gave was that it didn't fit with their tikanga, or tradition.

The ban is backed by DoC, which says the ban is for a totally different reason altogether - not the fish, not the tikanga, but the weeds.

Fish and Game says the iwi and DoC need to get their stories straight.

“You start to wonder if they are talking to each other or there are two different agendas here. And we don't know - it would be nice to know,” says Bryce Johnson.

The public was guaranteed access to these lakes in the $22 million settlement, unless it has adverse environmental effects - something the iwi must now prove to the Government.

John Key said he would like to see the issue resolved before the start of the duck shooting season.

The duck shooters have been using the lakes for 80 years but the iwi say it will not be bending.

 “One hundred and sixty years ago they were our lakes and we were in control. We're back in control,” says Port Nicholson trustee Liz Mellish.  

The majority of politicians were running a mile from the issue today, except for Peter Dunne, who is trying to broker a last-minute solution behind the scenes.

He suggests that shooting continue this season while the issue is sorted out. But with both sides so staunch, a deal may be difficult to reach.

3 News  

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

21 Mar 2010 07:47a.m.

Glenn wrote:

So is this just the start? how many more issues are we going to face in the future with land that has been 'given back'.

20 Mar 2010 02:54a.m.

Dissident Aggressor wrote:

I see kiwi racism is alive and well. If this happened on any private or DoC controlled land we probably wouldn't hear about it as it likely wouldn't be considered 'news worthy', but the minute Maori are involved then people become restless and the accusations start to fly.

From what I can gather, we're not talking about a permanent ban, just a ban for this season, so get over it and/or shoot somewhere else.

And no, kokupu don't fly, but if Maori feel like the shooters are disrespecting the habbitat of the kokupu, then caretakers their ban is reasonable in the name of conservation.

Get over yourselves Pakeha.

19 Mar 2010 10:56a.m.

Jim wrote:

To the Iwi - You say one thing, but do another. So who speaks with fork tongue? You are an embarrassment to all NZ'ers including Maori.
To DOC, I think your dept should be scrapped for just being idiots!!!

19 Mar 2010 10:43a.m.

kim wrote:

This trust signed a agreement so they are contractually obligated to allow access. If they don't the contract becomes nul and void and the lake should revert back to the crown until a new contract is negotiated... Thats just the way it is...unless you are Maori that is.
My guess is this is nothing to do with conservation and i would expect licences being sold to shoot there within a year or so....Its only about money as some Maori really have no interest in protecting anything as has been proved repeatedly they are for sale to the highest bidder.

19 Mar 2010 08:51a.m.

Obiwan wrote:

Just reverse the treaty settlement and be done with it.

19 Mar 2010 01:05a.m.

Si wrote:

I hope these tribes realise how ridiculous they sound. Although they'll never top the ones that wanted to sue NASA over the airspace above their land a few years back.

19 Mar 2010 12:04a.m.

cyril wrote:

Who wants these A-holes owning the forshore and seabed. In 5 min they would be charging you to sunbath or go for a swim if it doesnt damage the weed or something.