A former curator/manager of Kaitaia's Far North Regional Museum has accused its successor, the Te Ahu Heritage Museum, of cultural vandalism.
Des Cotman, who now works as an independent museum consultant, said he had been appalled to learn that an 11-metre section of the mizzen mast from the Forrest Hall, which was wrecked on 90 Mile Beach in bizarre circumstances in 1909, had been cut into pieces with a chainsaw, reportedly so the wood could be used to make money for the museum.
"This was a remarkable relic," Mr Cotman said.
"It held a true Far North story with links right across the world. This is cultural vandalism at the hands of those people who currently control the museum.
"For goodness' sake, if the local museum could not cope with the mast section's on-going care and conservation they should have passed it on to an institution or group who would have.
"Our community has been badly let down by this numbskull act. (Museum trust board chairman) Phil Cross is very mistaken in the belief that he somehow owned the mast. In reality he simply had a kaitiaki role that brought with it a serious duty of care."
Vic Hensley, immediate past chairman of the Far North Regional Museum, who brought the mast's fate to public notice, was equally outraged. He had tried, unsuccessfully, to have the mast declared as a nationally significant object, and while that did not happen (apparently because of its lack of antiquity) it remained a significant piece of Far North history.
"They've chainsawed it into pieces, leaving about six feet at the top, where it was stepped for the top mast," Mr Hensley said.
"Phil Cross has said that they had nowhere to put it, and that the decision to cut it up was made by the board, but I don't accept that. It didn't have to go inside; it was in perfect condition when it finally washed up on the beach, and it should have been registered as a historic artefact."
The only other known relic of the Forrest Hall was the ship's bell, which is now at Te Hapua School.
Mr Hensley said then Far North Mayor Wayne Brown had begun the registration process, at Mr Hensley's request, but the Historic Places Trust had sought more information and the process had lapsed. He did not believe that absolved the museum, however.
"How competent was the board to make a decision like this?" he asked.
"As I understand it it's been cut up to make souvenirs that the museum will sell to make money, but that wasn't a decision for the museum board to make. The mast was legally owned by the Far North District Council.
"Mutilating and destroying an artefact like this is disgraceful. This is a huge cock-up by Phil Cross and his board."
Another former museum trustee, Ray Wiblin, has reacted in similar vein - letters page 4.
Mr Cross declined to respond.