Editorial: Absurd attempt to copyright nature

Can an intellectual property right be applied to something that is not man-made? Can copyright of sorts be placed on rivers, mountains, the sea, the sky or flora and fauna? Well, yes, if you subscribe to the perverse thinking of the Department of Conservation. It wants to restrict the taking and use of images of Mt Cook. If its view prevails, any activity being promoted, filmed, photographed or painted must be one that "normally occurs" within the Aoraki-Mt Cook National Park.

This curious thinking, contained in the park's draft management plan, is justified on the grounds of deference to the values and principles of the local iwi. Mt Cook is sacred to Ngai Tahu, as, in some shape or form, is many a towering peak to neighbouring people in many parts of the world. Surely the people of the Kenyan tribe living at the foot of Kilimanjaro reserve a special place in their hearts for that mountain. As, indeed, do the people of Auckland, Maori and Pakeha alike, for One Tree Hill. Never mind, Ngai Tahu sensitivities persuade the department that it should have the power to veto projects that do not portray Mt Cook appropriately.

What that means in practical terms is that the filming of a $220 million Hollywood movie, Vertical Limit, would not have taken place in the national park. Nor will print and television advertisements be shot in the park any longer. The draft management plan decries previous supposed insensitivities, such as the shooting of a dog-food advertisement and the building of an American-style log cabin for filming purposes. What the exact damage was if no trace was left of the cabin after its dismantling and removal, or no dogs were left to disturb the local wildlife, is not explained.

If film crews in their hundreds were spoiling the national park for others, the department might have grounds for some sort of restrictions. Such is not the case. Yet among the 300,000 people who visit Mt Cook each year, there are particular concerns about the increasing number of trampers and mountaineers. Thus, the draft plan proposes they should be required to bag their faeces in special biodegradable bags and carry them to a sanitary source of disposal. That seems a reasonable proposal, given the obvious health and environmental hazards. The department, however, cannot help itself. "Additionally, defecating on Aoraki, the ancestral tupuna, is highly offensive to Ngai Tahu values," it notes.

As though the same does not apply in most corners of the world. Yet the same department's management plan gave carte blanche to the $10 million redevelopment of the park hotel, the Hermitage. That was included as part of the present management plan and did not require resource consent from the Mackenzie District Council.

That all suggests an illogical sense of priorities. Political correctness clearly matters more than a 10-storey redevelopment with considerable implications for the environment. And that wishy-washy thinking raises questions. Who, for example, would decide what images portrayed Mt Cook appropriately? Presumably, that type of policing appeals to those in the Department of Conservation who thought up the bizarre concept in the first place.

And just what are Ngai Tahu's guiding values and principles for the depiction of what the department considers "their" mountain? They are unexplained. Presumably they relate to a wish to preserve a site of significance and scenic grandeur. Who would disagree? Preservation is the reason we have national parks.

Within the park framework, there is sometimes friction between those fostering that aim and those seeking development, often of a commercial nature, so that as many people as possible can enjoy the mountain.

But it is difficult to see how film-making carried out under strict environmental control undermines the necessary balance. It is to be hoped that Ngai Tahu's values do not also incorporate any concept of exclusivity based on links to the iwi. No matter how sacred the mountain, no group can make such a claim.

Political correctness went far enough when Mt Cook adopted the joint appellation of Aoraki and when Taranaki, likewise, was twinned with Mt Egmont. We are encouraged to use the original Maori place names, but at least we have an option. That sort of choice would be denied by those absurd enough to want to copyright nature.