Before she will sit down with the man who wants to mine her hapū’s backyard, Mere Kepa insists he meet her ancestors.
“I bring them through the garage, into the hallway. We have a small house,” explains Kepa, who lives inTakahiwai in Northland’s Bream Bay.
The bay’s gleaming white sand is picturesque and perfect for use in high-strength concrete. Kepa is concerned a plan to dredge the bay’s seabed will erode the community’s sweeping beaches.
The sand mining project, which is included in the controversial Fast-track Act, feels like another blow for mana whenua.
“Digging up that land is painful. It signals the continual colonisation of Māori, it signals the continual subjugation of Māori,” she says.
Adorning Kepa’s hallway walls are photographs of her family. She introduces him to each in turn.
“The first ancestor is Taurau. He was the chief of Whangārei in the late 1880s. Then I introduce him to my parents. I introduce him to my uncles who all served in the 28 battalion.”
These introductions form part of her tikanga, given to outsiders. She’s from the hapū of Te Parawhau and Te Patuharakeke o te Parawhau. The meet-and-greet is both intended to put him at ease and to reinforce Kepa’s position.
“It’s a Māori position, it’s a hapū position,” she says.
No Sand Mining posters and signage around Waipu and Ruakaka. Photo / RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly
Callum McCallum represents the family-owned business – McCallum Bros – who want to mine up to eight million cubic metres of sand from Bream Bay’s seabed over 35 years.
He is in Kepa’s house at her invitation after she emailed him with concern over the proposal, which is a listed project in the new Fast-track legislation, which aims to enable a swifter decision-making process for infrastructure and development projects with “significant regional or national benefits”.
Kepa knew the company was talking to two hapū trust groups in the area, but she had heard nothing.
“There’s no consultation among Māori,” she says.
“I pointed out that they needed to talk beyond the two trusts that they are speaking so that they get a better – or a broader – understanding of how Māori people living particularly close to Bream Bay are feeling, that is, we’re feeling excluded.”
McCallum agreed to join Kepa for a cup of tea and a chat, and told her he could stay for one hour. The conversation over the kitchen table with Kepa, her sister and her cousin lasted for nearly three.
He reminded her of her father, she says. “My dad was a charming, intelligent, all-encompassing man. I felt, ‘Hey, I know this guy’.”
She did not let his charming personality get in the way of making her opposition to the mining proposal clear. The land contiguous to the mining project belongs to Te Parawhau hapū. “We are very interested in what happens to our land, particularly if it’s going to slip into the sea.”
Kepa has lived on the harbour all her life and has seen it change over the years. As a child she would gather cockles from a sandbank. The cockles and the sandbank no longer exist. Now she worries the beach will disappear too.
“I do know it’ll become mud because I sit here daily and look at the mud that’s replaced the beautiful white sand that was here most of my childhood.”
Langs Beach. Photo / RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly
MaCallum’s response to her concern is that he has expert scientific advice and will soon be releasing a report from engineering consultants, Tonkin and Taylor. The company is proposing dredging sand from almost 5km from shore, and outside what is referred to as the depth of closure. It is thought sand past this point does not wash in and out to the beaches of the bay.
The fact the application will be considered under the Fast-track process adds another worry as this legislation does not include a public submission phase. Kepa knows a cultural impact assessment report is being written by Te Patuharakeke Trust, and this will include how the proposal impacts cultural values, but details have been scant.
“We know nothing about who is writing that cultural values assessment report. We know nothing about the values that are going to be written in.”
Around 1500 people protested against McCallum Bro's Bream Bay sand mining proposal. Photo / Nigel Yellowlees
McCallum emails Kepa after the meeting, acknowledging a protest against the mining is planned. “It would be great if one of the outcomes of the meeting was the formation of a group of representatives who could engage in meaningful dialogue with us,” he writes, saying he is keen to dispel “misinformation”.
“We also want to investigate possible offsets and benefits that the community could enjoy.”
The company’s website explains it wants a community partnership and suggests the company could provide funds to local predator control and sand dune restoration. “We’ll be extracting sand from a common area that we all share, and so we think it is fair and important that funding from our activity goes back to the communities we share it with,” the website says.
Will addressing misinformation and offering to support local initiatives be enough to sway people’s thoughts on mining?
“I think he’s hopeful that he will be able to change our minds,” says Kepa.
For all his charm, it seems unlikely McCallum will be able to sway her view that the land holds spiritual meaning. Any mining in the bay is “absolutely unacceptable”, she says.
“I don’t want people coming in cutting up the divine land for their profit.”
McCallum Bros is no newcomer to sand mining or facing local opposition to its activities.
“Every mining, every quarrying, every landfill [project] goes through exactly the same process that we are going through, the same nimbyism,” McCallum says.
Further down the coast, the company has mined the sand off Pākiri and Mangawhai’s beaches for 80 years, with much of it ending up in concrete used to build Auckland’s infrastructure. Locals there have been locked in a decades-long battle to stop the mining, and it appears that they may have succeeded.
McCallum’s ability to continue mining Pakiri’s sand is uncertain after failing to renew resource consents from Auckland Council – and failing to win an Environment Court case seeking to overturn the council’s decision.
The Environment Court found evidence provided by McCallum’s about the ecological effects of the mining at Pakiri had been “patchy”, “inconclusive” and even “incorrect”.
It noted there was a dearth of information from the company about the likely environmental impact of the sand mining: “There appears to have been an assumption by the Applicant that it was for the opposition parties to prove that there was an adverse effect,” the decision says.
No Sand Mining posters and signage around Waipu and Ruakaka. Photo / RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly
The court heard in one instance, the company’s dredge had left 2.7m deep trenches in the sea floor, a discovery made by a local who organised a seabed survey himself. No enforcement action was taken by Auckland Council. This meant on the fast-track application form the company could claim a clean track record.
The court also found mining’s effects on mana whenua could not be mitigated.
It said while there were clear benefits to allow the extraction, saying it has been a cheap and plentiful source of sand for 80 years, this came at a price. “These economic benefits to Auckland and to McCallum Bros and others have occurred at direct cost to mana whenua and the embayment itself.”
One hapū representative described the effect of mining sand from the area as disabling the hapū‘s ability to act as kaitiaki, or guardians of the area.
The company has appealed the Environment Court’s decision and McCallum says it is also appealing the court costs awarded to the successful parties – which tallied $500,000.
Asked if he is confident the company will not repeat dredging errors in Bream Bay, McCallum says the boat the company uses now does not dredge as deeply as the boat which made the trenches.
The next step for the company is to submit a fully-fleshed-out application to be considered by an expert panel to assess. This panel will make a decision to either approve or decline the application, and can set conditions the company must adhere to.
The full application has not been lodged yet, but it appears the company is working to ensure there is no dearth of information on the effects of mining this time. In the background, there has been a flurry of activity as McCallum Bros has worked on commissioning reports from various experts such as Niwa and Tonkin and Taylor to accompany its application.
These include reports on the economics of the proposal and the suitability of Bream Bay’s sand. There are also reports on what the likely effect of the dredging will have on, sand movement, surf breaks, the impact on whales, dolphins and birds and the impact dredging will have on creatures living on the seabed and safety for other boats.
Not all the reports have been completed, but the company’s website describes its impact as low risk.
McCallum Bros says because it will dredge almost 5km from the shoreline, where sand does not shift from sea to shore, the dredging will not cause beach erosion, or destroy the surf breaks in the area. The company estimates there is more than 39 million cubic metres of sand in the area it wants to dredge. Its application seeks to take one quarter of this amount.
It says the effect on marine ecology will be low, with species in the proposed path of dredging being nationally and locally common species. The risk of the boat striking a dolphin or Bryde’s whale is low, according to the company. The impact on birdlife is also expected to be low, the critically endangered fairy tern which lives in the area is not known to forage for food that far out to sea.
Importantly it says Auckland needs the sand to grow housing and sewerage, and infrastructure needs high-strength concrete, and the sand in the Bream Bay is ideal.
As part of the application process it needs to consult with a long list of Māori groups likely to be affected, or which, under the Marine and Coastal (Takutai Moana) Act may have applications in for customary title.
McCallum says the company has contacted those groups, and requested cultural impact reports.
He is also happy to meet with locals to discuss the proposal, although he prefers small gatherings. “I’m not really in favour of going in front of 200 people who want to abuse you.”
There are groups who are vocal in their opposition to the proposal, but “they’re very small in number”, he says.
“It’s quite an emotional argument at the moment and we would like people who are opposed to actually read what we are putting up on our website.”
He was not apprehensive walking into Kepa’s home, even though he was aware she was not in favour of mining. It’s not his “first rodeo” and she seemed nice on the phone, he says.
“The worst thing you do is personalise this, and we won’t do that. We’ve got a job to do, we’ve got Auckland to supply sand to.”
He has the impression Kepa is frustrated.
“It seems she doesn’t actually speak for any of the major groups and the major groups don’t listen to her.”
The consultation
Dave Milner is co-leader of the environmental unit of the Te Patuharakeke Trust Board and is working on a Cultural Impact Assessment report for McCallum Bros.
The company is paying the trust for this report, which Milner says is standard practice. The payment is for the resource needed to create the report, and does not come with any promise of a watered-down report.
“We oppose mining,” he says. “Whether it’s sand mining in the marine space, or on land.” This view has been shared with everyone he says, including McCallum Bros.
He understands people might see the willingness to create this report for the company as being in cahoots with them, but explains under the fast-track process this is the only chance the hapū will get to have a say.
He is waiting for more information from the company about its plans and effects before going to the local community, this will include talking to elders, whānau and rangatahi. There will be hui at marae, and workshops, “so we make sure we are touching base with our hapū”.
He wants to put to bed any perception people may have that because money has passed hands that something “dodgy” is going on. “There’s a process we go through.”
Representatives of the trust attended the beach protest and hope the information about what it is doing filters through to people who are concerned that the trust has received money from McCallums.
Will the locals benefit from mining? “No,” he answers. He gives the same answer when asked if he has met any locals in favour of the proposal.
“The community has a strong voice,” says Milner. “The community has created a great groundswell in voicing their concern. You would be mad not to recognise the community needs to be part of the consultation process.”
Local voices
Emotion hovers close to the surface for Josephine Pirihi, threatening to break through at any moment. She introduces herself with a pepeha, listing her connection with the mountains, sea and people of the area.
She exudes warmth, locals she bumps into on the beach get a hug, but there’s also a feeling of weariness. She describes the prospect of mining as “devastating”.
“They’ve taken our land, now they want our moana as well,” she says.
Josephine Pirihi stands on the sands of Ruakaka Beach with a red, white, and black banner - the colours of the Tino Rangatiratanga flag - cloaked around her shoulders. Photo / RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly
A banner is draped across her lap – strips of black, red and white have been carefully sewn together in the style of a tino rangatiratanga flag. It’s one of 12 completed banners she has made herself to protest mining. More strips of fabric are piled up on her work table, ready for sewing before being handed off to her brother for signwriting.
Her brother, Parata Pirihi, has hand-lettered slightly different messages on each.
“No sand mining Bream Bay,” reads one. Another has the same no sand mining message for Waipu Cove, and a third for Ruakākā.
Pirihi is nearly 70 and has spent her life in Bream Bay.
She does not expect to be alive when the dredging boat finally leaves the bay, but she fears taking so much sand from the pristine area will cause lasting damage.
There is a raw, pleading note to her voice when she speaks.
“What future have our grandchildren, your grandchildren, Aotearoa’s grandchildren got?”
She does not believe any employment will flow to locals from the mining.
“They’re just coming in to do the big land grab and now the big moana grab. Just that happened back in the day, but I don’t want to see that happen to the future of my mokos [grandchildren].”
Dredging the seabed could alter the ecosystem. “I worry about the kaimoana first, that’s what we live off. Everybody lives on the moana like that.”
Her brother has seen firsthand what effect dredging can have on sea life. He worked on a sand dredge in Australia. He is horrified at what would be sucked up as the dredge was pulled over the sea floor.
“I was dredging out wildlife. Snakes, turtles, seagulls and their nests,” he says.
He fears what damage the dredge could do in Bream Bay, saying there are scallop beds and crabs in the area. The crabs attract snapper, trevally and gurnard to the area.
On the dredge he worked on, sea life which got sucked up was pulverised.
“They come out like manure. They come out like bark. If you put bark on your garden that’s what it will come out like.”
McCallum’s website assures people the boat they use has screens which stop anything bigger than 2.5mm going through the hopper. Large items are returned to the sea. Species which were sucked up by the dredge “were typically very robust”, the website says. These survived the ordeal with “minimal harm”.
Parata Pirihi is not convinced the boat will stick to dredging 5km from shore, he worries it will inch closer to shore. If the fast-track expert panel gives sand mining the green light, he expects locals will monitor the boat’s path to ensure it doesn’t stray closer to shore than it is allowed to.
“It’s going to be tough,” he says. “We’ve only got a 10 foot dinghy to go out there and try and stop them.”
The ‘gobby’ hustler helping the locals
While Callum McCallum is taking time out for cups of tea to win locals over with charm, Emma Hart is almost constantly on her phone: hustling.
She paces back and forward as she talks and texts, high heels clacking, the red sequins on her skirt shimmering with her constant movement.
Hart is a newer resident to the area, shifting to Langs Beach from the South Island. She calls her home in Langs Beach her “piece of paradise”. She is one of the pivotal figures in the local fight but does not see herself as an instigator. “I’m the glue,” she says, explaining there are about 10 core people organising different aspects of opposition.
“I just happen to be the most gobby one because I have worked in communications.”
Langs Beach resident Emma Hart. Photo / RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly
The fact this is going through as a listed project in the Fast-track legislation has added a level of urgency to her hustling for local voices to be heard, there is a rapidly closing window before the expert panel will be considering the application.
She lists names of people gathering petition signatures, sewing banners, and names of shops that have put protest posters up, part of her hustle is making sure people are in the right place at the right time. The protest, set to take place during Auckland Anniversary weekend, is top of the agenda. She is expecting a good turnout, and as it turns out, gets one. She later estimates 1500 people attended. These included people from Te Parawhau and Te Patuharakeke hapū.
There is a fear the community’s dissent and the 9000 petition signatures will not change the outcome.
“There’s a very high bar for proposals to be declined,” says Hart.
The expert panel assessing the project needs to give priority to ensuring infrastructure and development projects go ahead. Local opposition and environmental concerns take a back seat.
It is not clear how much weight the cultural impact assessments will have on the expert panel’s decision.
The locals may lose something which has been part of their rohe for generations, Hart says.
“Without a doubt the most concerning part of the Fast-track Act is its calculated move to cut out community opposition. The Fast-track Act is not meant for us.”
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
