Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for
a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and
private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without
the permission of the Author.
Hokia Id te whenua
A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for
the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in Soil Science
at
Massey University, Palmerston North,
New Zealand
Nick Roskruge
2007
Abstract
This thesis aIms to produce a distinctive model for the sustainable horticultural
development of Maori resources, primarily land. It is inclusive of tikanga Maori and
indigenous production systems based on the unique body of knowledge aligned to Maori .
The integration of this knowledge with western science is both argued and applied through
the model itself. The hypothesis applied was that matauranga Maori relevant to horticulture
and pedology can inform and add value to the future development of Maori land resources .
The thesis is bui lt on a unique set of contributing knowledge bases aligned to soils and
horticultural management supported by three case studies, identified through their common
association i .e . whakapapa links. The format of the thesis intentionally follows science
principles in structure and presentation and some assumptions are made regarding base
knowledge surrounding Maori cultural factors and the science disciplines relative to soils
and horticul ture .
The indigenous element, including Maori knowledge, is incorporated into the model using
a triadic kosmos/corpus/praxis approach. Where kosmos is applied as Te Ao Miiori, corpus
as miitauranga Miiori and praxis as tikanga Miiori, the relationship between each element
is clear and the interpretation of the associated knowledge becomes more apparent and can
be applied to cultural assessments of resources, including land.
The crux of the cultural assessment model is the quality of information used to assess
Maori resources, especially from the cultural perspective. The Maori cultural paradigm,
traditional horticulture and pedology, and various decision systems are purposefully
accessed to act as contributors to the assessment model and to highlight the diversity and
quality of information land managers have at their disposal .
The ability to apply a cultural layer drawn from a body of knowledge not previously
included in decision models relative to land utility in New Zealand is the key point. of
difference of the model. The model is discussed from the perspective of its beneficial role
for future use by Maori and how it can be continuously refined to meet the needs of Maori
land owners and thus contribute to the rangatiratanga of Maori .
Acknowledgements
Kia mihia te mano t ini kua mene k i nga Hawaiiki katoa. Ratou te tutUtanga 0 te puehu, te
whiunga 0 te kupu i nga wa takatU a i ratou, tatou te urupa 0 ratou ma, nga waihotanga mai e
hapai nei i 6 ratou wawata, tUmanako hoki . Kia ora tatou.
It i s impossible to individually acknowledge every person who has been involved in this
thes is from its conception through to completion. To all the whanau, friends, and
colleagues, including my supervisors, who have contributed w ith positive encouragement
and input; nga mihi atu. I have been especially priviledged to have shared t ime and
knowledge with many kaumatua and kui a around the country and they have in their own
way given this thesis i ts mauri or energy. If the outcome of this work contributes to our
future generat ions ' abi l i ty to manage our resources as intended then the work will have
achi eved its aim.
No reira, nga mihi atu ki a koutou, nga mihi aroha ki a koutou,
Tena ano tatou katoa.
11
Table of Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................ i
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................... ii
Table of Contents .......................................................................................... iii
List of Tables .................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................ xi
List of Plates .................................................................................................. xii
List of Appendices ....................................................................................... xiii
Introduction .................................................................................................. xv
Te Kiimaranui a Tonga ............................................................................................... xvii
Chapter 1: General introduction .................................................................. 1
1 . 1 Hypothesis ................................................................................................................... 1
1 .2 Background ................................................................................................................. 1
1 .3 Case studies ................................................................................................................. 3
1 .3 . 1 Wakatu Incorporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1 . 3 .2 Parewahawaha hapulParewahawaha Marae, Bulls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1 .3 . 3 Tahuri Whenua Incorporated Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1 .4 Research objectives .................................................................................................... 5
1 .5 Chapters ...................................................................................................................... 5
Chapter 2: Methodology ................................................................................ 9
2.1 Introduction .................... . . ........... ............................................................................... 9
2.2 Scientific theory ........................................................................................................ 10
2.3 Applied science ......................................................................................................... 1 1
2.4 Kaupapa Maori methodology ................................................................................. 1 2
2.5 Participatory research approaches ......................................................................... . 15
2.6 Ethnopedology framework .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.7 Case study methodology .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.8 Data collection ...................................................................... � ............. ...................... 19
111
2.9 Maori knowledge and Maori science .. ....................... . ... . . . ..... .......... . . ........... . ......... 21
2 .10 Chapter summary ................................ . . . . ........ ................................ . ..................... 23
Chapter 3: Maori and horticulture ................... ....... ... ........... . . ..... ...... ... . .... 24
3 .1 Introduction ........................................................... ............. .............................. ........ 24
3 .2 Maori and horticulture ......................... .................. ....................... .... . . .................... 24
3 .3 Whakapapa .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3 .4 I te timatanga (in the beginning) .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3 .4. 1 Maru . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3 .5 Maramataka ..................................................................... ...................................... . . 32
3 .5 . 1 Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3 .6 Whenua ..................................................................................................................... 36
3 .7 Tikanga .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.8 Chapter summary .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Chapter 4: Te Oneone: Ethnopedology ...................................................... 41
4.1 Introduction .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4 .2 Soils - Maori nomenclature .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.3 Land characteristics (including Maori nomenclature) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.4 S ite selection .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4 .5 Terracing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.6 Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.7 Maori soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
4.8 Drainage .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.9 Soil fertility . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 59
4 .10 Irrigation .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.1 1 Chapter summary .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Chapter 5: Mara Kai .................................................................................... 62
5.1 Introduction .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.2 Traditional horticulture .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5 .3 Pre-European phase (pre 1769) .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5 .3 . 1 Stone gardens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5 .3 .2 Wetland cultivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
IV
5.4 Contemporary Maori horticulture ......................................................................... 68
5.5 Phases of contemporary Maori horticulture ......................................................... 69
5 . 5 . 1 Post Contact Phase ( 1 769 - 1 840) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
5 . 5 .2 Post Treaty ofWaitangi Phase ( 1 840 - 1 860) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
5 . 5 . 3 Post Land Wars Phase ( 1 860 - 1 940s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
5 . 5 .4 Post World War 2 Phase ( 1 940s - 1 980s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Treaty of Waitangi Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
5 .5 . 5 Contemporary Society ( 1 980s onwards) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1
5.6 Examples of present-day Maori horticulture ........................................................ 83
5 .6 . 1 Ngai Tukairangi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
5 .6 .2 Moteo Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
5 .6 .3 Wi Pere Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
5 . 6.4 Te Mara 0 Te Umutahi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
5 .6 .5 Tanehopuwai Gardens, Te Kuiti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
5.7 The social politics of horticulture . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
5.8 Maori economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
5.9 Organics .................................................................................................................... 91
5.iO Chapter summary .................................................................................................. 92
Chapter 6: Key crops in Maori Horticulture ............................................. 93
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
6.2 Kfimara - Ipomoea batatas (Sweetpotato) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
6.3 Hue - Lagenaria siceraria (bottle gourd) ............................................................... 96
6.4 Uwhi/Uhi - Dioscorea alata (yam) .......................................................................... 98
6.5 Tii I Kouka - Cordyline spp. (cabbage tree) ........................................................... 99
6.6 Taro - Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . 1 02
6.7 Aute (Maro) -Broussonetia papyrifera (paper mulberry) .................................. 1 03
6.8 TaewalPeruperu/Riwai/Parareka - Solanum tuberosum (Maori potatoes) ....... 104
6.9 Kanga -Zea mays (Indian corn/maize) ................................................................ 1 06
6.10 Kamokamo - Cucurbitaceae family ................................................................... 108
6. 1 1 Rengarenga I Maikaika -A rth rop odium cirratum (rock lily) ........................ ... 109
6. 12 pfiha (sometimes given as puwha)/Rauriki/Pororua - Sonchus spp . .............. 1 1 0
v
6.13 Raria I Paeal NIkol Pukal Reareal NanIl Pora - Brassica oleracea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 12
6.14 Poroporo -Solanum aviculare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 2
6.15 Rarakeke -Phormium tenax (New Zealand lowland o r swamp flax) .. . . . . . ... . . . 112
Wharariki -Phormium cookianum (NZ coastal or mountain flax) . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . 1 12
6.16 Karaka - Corynocarpus laevigatus (Kopi [Chatham Islands]) . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . 1 15
6.17 Aruhe/Roi -Pteridium esculentum/P. aquilinumlPteria acquilinel (Fernroot) 1 1 6
6. 18 Watercress -Lepidium sativum (Kowhitiwhitil Wata kirihil Kirihi wata) .. . .. 1 19
6.19 Raupo - Typha orientalis (bulrush) . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . .... . . . . . . . . . 1 19
6.20 Kokihi I Rengamutu - Tetragonia tetragonioides (NZ Spinach) . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.2 1 Para -Marattia salicina (King fern or horseshoe fern) .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 20
6.22 Pikopiko .. . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . .. . .... . .... . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . ... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 1 2 1
6.23 Mamaku IKorau - Cyathea medullaris (Black tree fern) .. . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 122
6.24 Nlkau -Rhopalostylis sapida - (Miko [Chatham Islands] ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 23
6.25 Other crops .. . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . 1 24
6.26 Crop migration . . . . . . .. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ..... . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 124
6.27 Chapter summary .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . ... . ... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Chapter 7: Decision systems ...................................................................... 127
7.1 Introduction .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
7 .2 Systems approach .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
7.3 Traditional decision systems .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . .. . . ..... ... . . 128
7 .3 . 1 Kosmos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 28
Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
7 .3 .2 Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 1
7 . 3 . 3 Praxis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 1
7.4 The application of tikanga in traditional horticultural management .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . 132
7 .4. 1 Seasonal approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 34
7 .4 .2 Labour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 34
7 .4 .3 Seed selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 34
7 .4.4 Crop production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 35
7 .4. 5 Harvest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 36
VI
7.4 .6 Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 36
7 .4 .7 Preserving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 8
7 .4 .8 Trading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] 38
7.S Case study - Sample Crop; taewa ......................................................................... 139
7 .5 . 1 Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] 39
7 .5 .2 Rituals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 40
7 . 5 . 3 Pre-cultivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 40
7 . 5 .4 Cultivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4 1
7 . 5 . 5 Seed preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4 1
7 . 5 . 6 Planting days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 43
7 . 5 . 7 Crop husbandry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 43
7 .5 . 8 Harvest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 43
7 . 5 . 9 Storage methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 43
7.6 Contemporary decision support systems . ............. . . ........... ...... ..... ... . . ......... . . . . ... . . 144
7.7 Soil and resource assessment models ... . . ... ... . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . ........ . . ...... 147
7.8 Education needs .. ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . ......... . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . . . 150
7.9 Chapter summary ... . ...... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . ........... . . ... . . . . . . ..... .. ... .... . . ... . . . . ... . .... ....... . . 1 52
Chapter 8: Case Study Report .................................................................. 153
8. 1 Introduction . . ... . . . . . . ... ... . . . ....... ... . . . ....... . ... . . ... . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . ..................................... ...... 153
8.2 Case study 1 : Wakatu Incorporation . . . ..... . . ..... . . ... . . . . . . .......................... ........... . . . . 155
8 .2 . 1 History - te toto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 55
8 .2 . 2 Establishing the Incorporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 57
8 .2 . 3 Wakatu in the 2 1 st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 59
8 .2 .4 Cultural evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] 62
Kosmos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 63
Collective Wakatu Incorporation values set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 63
Praxis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 65
8 .2 . 5 Physical evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 66
Environmental . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 66
Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
vu
Spatial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .. . . 169
8 .2 .6 Capital evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 70
Structural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 71
Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Natural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 71
8 .2 .7 Economic evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 1
8 .2 . 8 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 72
8.3 Case Study 2 : Ngati Parewahawaha Hapu 0 Ngati Raukawa ... . ..... . .... . ...... . . .. . . 173
8 .3 . 1 History - te toto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 73
8 .3 .2 Entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 74
8 . 3 . 3 Cultural evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 77
Kosmos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 77
Corp'us . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Praxis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 78
8 .3 .4 Physical evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 78
Environmental . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 78
Soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 79
Spatial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
8 . 3 . 5 Capital evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 82
Structural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
Natural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
8 . 3 . 6 Economic evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 83
�.3 .7 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 83
8.4 Case Study 3 : Tahuri Whenua Inc. Soc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 85
8.4. 1 History of establishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 85
8 .4 .2 Cultural evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Kosmos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
VU1
Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Praxis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
8 .4 .3 Land use decision systems and taewa production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 89
8 .4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 90
8.5 Chapter summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . ... . ..... . . . .... . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 192
Chapter 9: Model ....................................................................................... 193
9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
9.2 Establishing a framework .. . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . .. . ... . . . . . . . . . . ...... . 193
9.3 Maori resource assessment model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . 193
9.4 Cultural Indicators (Cl) for Maori land assessment model . ... . . � . . . . . . . . . . ..... ...... . . . 196
9.5 Decision matrix ... .... ..... . . . . . . . ... ... . . . . . . ... . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . ... . . . . . ... . . ... . . . . . . . . . 198
9.6 Implementation pathway . . . . . . ... . . ... . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . 199
9.7 Physical indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . . ... . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . 200
9.8 Capital indicators . . . . ... . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
9.9 Economic indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . ..... . ... . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
9. 10 Chapter summary . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
Chapter 10: Discussion .............................................................................. 205
10 .1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
10.2 Maori knowledge . . . . . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 205
10.3 Maori and horticulture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 206
10.4 Maori and soils ... ... . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . ..... . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. 208
10.5 Cultural assessment ..... . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
1 0 . 5 . 1 Decision processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 0
10.6 Rangatiratanga . . . . . . . . ....... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 2
10.7 Chapter summary . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 14
Conclusion ........................................................................................... ........ 215
References ........................................................... � ....................................... 218
Personal communications . . . ...... . . . ... . . . . ....... . . . . . ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . 241
Appendices .................................................................................................. 243
IX
List of Tables
Table 2 . 1 : A Maori Centred Research Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4
Table 3 . 1 : Identification of seasons i n Maori ca1endar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Table 3 .2 : Vernacular Maori terms for climate characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Table 4. 1 : Maori nomenclature for soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Table 4 .2 : Maori nomenclature for soi l parent materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Table 4.3 : Maori nomenclature for land forms and vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Table 5 . l : Crops introduced by early explorers to AotearoaiNew Zealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Table 5 .2: Maori Land Use Capabi lity (LUC) ratings- 1 998 (Source: MMOLDC,
1 998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Table 5 .3 : Maori land area by Maori Land Court (MLC) District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Table 6 . 1 : Varieties of Tii (cabbage tree) in New Zealand and their uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 1
Table 7 . 1 : Calendar of events in traditional Maori society for horticulture activities . . . . . . 1 33
Table 7 .2 : 1 0-step decis ion process used in decision & management processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 44
Table 8 . 1 : Vision and values identified by Wakatu Inc . - 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 64
Table 8 .2 : Soil test results - Robbies Block, Wakatu Inc . Motueka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 68
Table 8 .3 : SWOT Analysis : taewa production on Robbies Block, Wakatu
Incorporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 72
Table 8 .4: Core values identified by Ngati Parewahawaha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 77
Table 8 . 5 : Soil test results - Section 1 4 1 C2A Ohinepuhiawe B lock, Parewahawaha . . . . . . 1 80
Table 8 . 6 : SWOT Analysis : taewa production on Ohinepuhiawe 1 4 1 C2A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 84
Table 9 . 1 : Model for assessment of Maori land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 95
Table 9 .2 : Cultural Indicators (Cl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 97
Table 9 .3 : Sample decision matrix using success/fail approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 98
Table 1 0 . 1 : Comparison of decision processes after Boehlje & Eidman ( 1 984) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 1
x
List of Figures
Figure 1 . 1 : Map of Aotearoa New Zealand i ndicating places and local i ties
introduced in the text of the thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Figure 3 . 1 : Sample whakapapa relative to horticulture (Source: Roberts et al. , 2004) . . . . . 3 1
Figure 7 . 1 : Visual depiction of traditional systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 28
Figure 8 . 1 : Climate data, Motueka District - Temperatures (monthly averages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 70
Figure 8 .2 : Climate data, Motueka District - Rainfall distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 70
Figure 8 . 3 : Climate data, Ohakea District - Temperatures (monthly averages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 82
Figure 8 .4 : Climate data, Ohakea District - Rainfall distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 82
Figure 9 .1: Visual representation of Maori resource assessment model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
Figure 9 .2 : Implementation pathway for Maori land aSSeSSlTIent lTIodel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 99
Figure 9 .3 : Visual representation of data collection within model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
Xl
List of Plates
Plate 1 : Maunga Taranaki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xix
Plate 2 : Sample varieties of taewa (Solanum spp .) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 06
Plate 3 : Sample varieties of kanga (Zea mays) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Plate 4 : Sample of kamokamo (Cucurbita spp. ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 09
Plate 5 : Nlkau palm (Rhopalostylis sapida) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 23
Plate 6 : Selection of taewa cultivars (Solanum tuberosum) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 42
Plate 7 : Motueka district and Wakatu orchards - looking eastward towards Nelson . . . . . . . 1 5 8
P late 8 : Te Tau Ihu indicating Wakatu district. (Photo courtesy ofWakatu Inc.
2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1
Plate 9 : Wakatu marae, Nelson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 63
P late 1 0 : Robbies B lock looking to Whakarewa Street, Motueka (2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 67
Plate 1 1 : Parewahawaha marae, Bulls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 75
Plate 1 2 : Aerial view of Bulls district indicating Parewahawaha Marae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 75
Plate 1 3 : Parewahawaha Marae and surrounds - Section 1 4 1 C2A Ohinepuhiawe
block is the ploughed paddock to the right of the buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] 76
Plate 1 4 : Ohinepuhiawe Block 1 4 1 C2A (Spring 2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 76
Plate 1 5 : Tahuri Whenua hui, Te Keete Marae, Otorohanga, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9 1
Plate 1 6 : Hangi to complete harvest activities, Tahuri Whenua members, 23 March
2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9 1
Xll
List of Appendices
Appendix 1 : Maramataka Maori - Atiawa version . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
Appendix 2 : Indigenous biological indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
Appendix 3 : Maori Land Court Boundaries, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
Appendix 4: List of hue (Lagenaria siceraria) vernacular names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
Appendix 5 : List of taewa (Solanum spp .) vernacular names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Appendix 6: List of harakeke (Phormium tenax & P. cookianum) vernacular names . . . 250
Appendix 7: Pou herenga values as described by AREDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 1
Appendix 8 : Value statements - FoMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
Appendix 9 : So i l test results, Wakatu Case Study ......... ....... ........... . .... ....... . .......... ........ 254
Appendix 1 0 : Soi l test results, Parewahawaha Case Study . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
Appendix 1 1 : Rules & Objectives, Tahuri Whenua Inc . Soc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
Xlll
Ko Papa-to.anuku kei te tuku kai mo ona mokopuna i te ao i te tau, i te tau.
It is PapatLiiinuku [the Earth Mother] who, every season, provides food for her ojftpring in the world.
(Best, 1 995a:275)
WAIATA ORIORI (extract only)
. . . . . . Ko Hakirirangi ka u te uta;
Te kowhai ka ngaora, ka ringia te kete
Ko Manawaru, ko Araiteuru
Ka kitea e te tini, e te mano !
Ko Makauri anake i mahue atu i waho i Tokahuru
Ko te peka i rere mai ki uta ra hei kura mo
Mahaki .
Ko Mangamoteo, ko Uetanguru
Ko te koiwi ko Rongo-rapua
Waiho me tiki ake ki te kumara i a Rangi!
Ko Pekehawani ka noho i a Rehua
Ko Ruhiterangi ka tau kei raro:
Te Ngahuru tikotiko-iere
Ko Poututerangi
Te matahi 0 te tau, te putunga 0 te hinu, e tama e!
. . . . . It was Hakiri -rangi who reached the shore:
(Hakirirangi came on the Horouta waka and
introduced the kiimara)
And when the kowhai flowered, poured out her basket
at Manawaru and Araiteuru (Her plantations near
Tu ranga/Gis borne)
It was seen by the many, the multitude
Only Makauri was left behind at Tokahuru
Its branch sped ashore as a treasure for Mahaki
There are Mangamoteo and U etanguru
And the essence is Rongo-rapua (the name of the belt
in which she brought the kiimara here)
Let it be fetched from the kUmara ofRangi !
Pekehawani wi l l l ive with Rehua
And Ruhi-te-rangi come down below (all stars that
signal the onset of harvest time)
The autumn, time of heavy crops and singing;
Poututerangi (The tenth month or harvest time)
The eleventh month of the year, the abundance of rich
food, my boy.
This extract is from an oriori or lullaby that originates from Te Aitanga a Mahaki tribe near
Gisborne and is concerning the origin of kiimara in their district and the rituals and events
which are associated with the seasonal cycle ending each year with the harvest. It reminds
us of the importance of horticulture to Maori , especially the subsistence culture that existed
prior to European colonisation of Aotearoal New Zealand and the introduction of new
economic opportunities. The traditional knowledge that surrounds traditional horticulture
and associated activities is extensive and this thesis wi ll serve only as an introduction to
that store of knowledge.
XIV
Introduction
This thesis is researched and written using kaupapa Maori principles and as such rel ies on
personal experience and knowledge as Inuch as that drawn from academic research
processes to achieve a cri tical analys i s of the topic. As a descendant of Awanuiarangi it is
imperative that an understanding of the matauranga or customary knowledge aligned to the
descendants of Awanuiarangi is shown in any contemporary work. Put simply, it is
whakapapa that determines the cultural context in which we are nurtured and which we
apply to all activities in our l ives . For those descendants of Awanuiarangi, nurtured within
Te Atiawa in Taranaki, the tribal group who align to Awanuiarangi , whakapapa is the
commonality and the thread whi ch binds us as a people over all the generations - either
previous, present or to the future. The generations which have gone before us provide us
with our customs and much of the matauranga or knowledge which we apply as part of our
cultural identity. The practices and knowledge handed down intergenerationally are not
done so they can be justified in a non-Maori situation: they are given to strengthen the
cultural identity of the descendants and to provide them with the skills to promote and
maintain the cultural enviromnent.
Te Atiawa, also referred to traditional ly as Atiawa nui tonu, is defined in contemporary
terms as a tribe within Maori society, within New Zealand. In Maori terms it is an iwi
whose common denominator is descent from the eponymous ancestor Awanuiarangi, a
male ancestor or tupuna. The whakapapa or genealogical representation of the descent
from Awanuiarangi is encapsulated within iwi traditions and some aspects of that
knowledge wil l be presented here to provide the basis of cultural application to the
research.
Awanuiarangi was born to Rongoueroa between 30 and 40 generations ago after her l iaison
with Tamarau-te-heketanga-a-rangi . Rongoueroa was the daughter-in-law of Toi-te
Huatahi, a prominent man in the whakapapa of many iwi around Aotearoa. The late
Kaumatua Sonny Warn related the story to us that Toi-te-Huatahi ' s grandson Whatonga
was swept out to sea while watching a race in the Pikopiko-whiti lagoon in Hawaiiki. In
xv
searching for him Toi -te-Huatahi eventually came to Aotearoa and settled at Kapu-te-rangi,
a slnall pa overlooking the present township of Whakatane in the Bay of Plenty. At a later
time Whatonga made it back to Hawaiiki and was told of his grandfathers ' quest for him
and so eventually he too found his way to Aotearoa and joined him.
Toi-te-Huatahi was the father of Ruarangi who was InaITied to Rongoueroa. From their
tIDion they had Whatonga and another son prominent in many iwi whakapapa; Rauru.
When Rauru was a baby, Rongoueroa was stripped off and bathing him at the river when
she was noticed by a whatakura or celestial being called Tamarau-te-heketanga-a-rangi . He
was captivated by her beauty and watched her for some time. He approached her quite
closely without being seen but she saw his reflection in the water. Rongoueroa gazed at the
reflection for a long time and eventually turned around to see this man. They embraced and
before he returned to the heavens Tamarau-te-heketanga-a-rangi said "if you have a male
child name him Te Awa-nui-a-rangi after the river to which I descended from the heavens" .
Tamarau-te-heketanga-a-rangi was a direct descendant of Ranginui and Papatiianuku and i s
believed to have dwelt in the tenth heaven. The celestial o r spiritual origin of Tamarau-te
heketanga-a-rangi is a salient point for Atiawa of Taranaki and is remembered in the
whakatauaki - Te Atiawa 0 runga 0 te rangi (Atiawa of the heavens above) . Keenan (1994)
describes it as the ' celestial genesis ' of the Atiawa iwi and also notes this is the transition
from the cosmic realm - Ira Atua - to the mortal realm - Ira Tangata. The following
whakapapa or genealogical table shows his descent from the primceval parents :
RAN G INUI PAPATOANUKU
[K.AHUI AO
�O PO URI ; [AORARANGI
; lAO WHETUMA �O TATAI
;
frAMARAU TE HEKETANGA-A-RANGI ; i
AWANUIARANGI
XVI
Awanuiarangi married Tahu-ao-ariki, a woman of the Te Tini 6 Taitawaro people of the
Waitara district, a tribal group who resided in the north Taranaki region for luany
generations prior to the arrival of the Tokomaru waka in the 1 4th Century.
The following waiata tawhito celebrates the union of Tamarau-te-heketanga-a-rangi and
Rongoueroa and is retained by Atiawa. Waiata contribute to our whakapapa and help to
cement and consolidate the transmission of knowledge relayed to successive generations
and to promote and maintain whakapapa.
Tamarau no nmga i te rangi Tamarau from the heavens above
Heke iho ki raro ki te whakamarimari te tatari ai Came down to make love and waited
Ki te hurahanga i te tapora 0 Rongoueroa Until he could have Rongoueroa
to wife
Taku kuia e! taku kuia e!
Te ara 0 taku tupuna 0 tohia ai au
Ko te Atiawa no runga i te rangi
Ko te toki te tangatanga e te ra
Taringa mango ko kete nge
Ue ha! Ue ha!
Te Kumaranui a Tonga
She is our kuia! She is our kuia!
This is the consecrated pathway
of our ancestors
'"fe Atiawa trom the heavens above
The adze which can remove the very
sun from its axis [
' Te k�lmaranui Cl tonga' is an old and important whakatauaki or proverb for Ngati Rahiri ki
Taranaki2• It refers to the cultivated crops for which they were renowned and emphasises
the bounty of their crops. Translated it means ' the great kiimara crops of the south ' .
Kumara i s a crop better suited to the warmer northern regions of New Zealand yet Ngati
Rahiri had a reputation for the production of this crop in the cooler Taranaki region. This
I Translation as provided in 2000 by Atiawa kaumatua Hemi Bai ley, Motunui (since deceased)
2 Personal communication, Mrs Wharemawhai (Mina) Timutimu, Kuia 0 Ngati Rahiri, & others
XVll
recognIses their skills as horticulturists and managers of the land resource. In all, thi s
relationship to the whenua was a continuation of whakapapa, knowledge and experience,
from the past to the present - down the generations.
Within the history of N gati Rahiri there lie many references to the whenua; the land to
which they identify, to which they hold mana-whenua (primary status over the land) and to
which their survival is inextricably l inked. Although the s ize and population of this hapu is
relatively small in comparison to other iwi and hapu, they none-the-Iess retain an identity
with the whenua, the moana and the ngahere - their landscape, papakainga or residence,
'playground' for communal activities and history - which is recognised and accepted by
other tribes around New Zealand.
Tukuna mai he kapunga oneone ki a au hai tangi3
Send me a handful of soil so that I may weep over it (an expression of affection for ones native soil)
The l ink between the people and the land for Maori i s expressed in the whakatauaki above
and simply explained in the term ' tangata whenua' l iberal ly used to identify the indigenous
relationship between the people and the land, not just the genealogical connection but the
provider of sustenance. In this instance, the whenua or land component can be interpreted
as PapatUanuku or the wider natural resources.
As ' tangata whenua' and more specifically as 'Uri 0 Rahiri Pakarara' , the history and
traditions of the Ngati Rahiri tribe and the resources al igned to them are a part of the
upbringing of successive generations of the people. Maori are raised in the knowledge of
their tiipuna or ancestors ; where they l ived, cultivated, fought, worked, played and where
they interred their deceased. This is therefore whakapapa, the history of the people
including the genealogical process. For the most part, Maori have been raised secure in the
knowledge that the land or whenua (along with other resources) had sustained each
generation throughout the seasons, provided material for their shelter, weapons, tools and
clothing and most importantly, ensured the continuity ofwhakapapa for the tribe, from their
3 Mead, H. M. & Grove, N. , 200 1 : Nga pepeha a nga t[puna, Victoria University Press, Well ington. 448pp.
XVlll
origins to the present time. This now includes the political relationship of generations of
people promoting and maintaining the resource and vice versa, especially post-colonisation,
also contributing to the whakapapa of the people.
Ngati Rahiri ki Taranaki are a small iwi or tribe relative to other iwi . They align as a key
hapu or sub-grouping to Atiawa nui tonu ki Taranaki , however they hold a whakapapa and
internal kinship independent of Atiawa and one which is acknowledged by other tribes
around Aotearoa-New Zealand. In common with the other tribes of Taranaki, Ngati Rahiri
whakapapa directly to the maunga or mountain known as Taranaki (syn. Egmont) (Plate 1 ) .
Plate 1 : Maunga Taranaki
Photo courtesy of Peter Jeffrey, 2007
Over the many generations that Ngati Rahiri has lived on their lands in North Taranaki, at
least five centuries, they have formed and developed a distinct history or whakapapa. Their
knowledge of the resources on which they relied for ongoing sustenance was also their
strength. In modem terms they were geographers with a thorough understanding of their
landscape and role within it. They identified the intricacies of the landscape, applied names
to ensure continuity of the knowledge and utilised this information in their daily decisions.
They were also ecologists in that they knew the plant and animal makeup within their
boundaries and the factors which influenced the populations year-by-year, season-by-
XIX
season. As well, they were marine ecologists, marine biologists and oceanographers with
their expert knowledge of the oceans, marine resources and living population dependant on
them. Ngati Rahiri were also resource managers in its ' purest sense and more importantly,
they were horticulturists .
As horticulturists they utilised their knowledge and expertise of the environment and
resources - soil, climate, water, seasonal variations and labour - to work the land to
produce crops for themselves and for bartering or hospitality purposes. The importance of
their knowledge of the soils resource and crops as a food source to compliment the bounty
of the forests and oceans cannot be underestimated in pre-colonial times and will be
elaborated on in this thesis.
This project will examine the relationship of Maori, specifically iwi, hapu and whanau such
as Ngati Rahiri to the whenua - in particular the soil component of the whenua - and how
the relationship can be restored to facilitate the econolnic and social development of Maori
in the 2 1 st Century. The historical and personal relationships of Maori to the soil resource
will be examined and put into context with today ' s society and knowledge. The tool for
land utilisation for this particular project will be horticulture or crop production.
Primarily it is the activities of horticulture and soil resource management by Maori that will
be examined and from this the opportunity to place the Maori horticulturist from traditional
to contemporary production systems will be discussed. The renewal of a relationship
between a people and a remnant resource to drive an economic approach to the land is the
expected outcome. To achieve this, a close study of the effects of history, politics and
culture will also be applied. How do we, as Maori, return to the whenua to not only sustain
ourselves, but to create an income for our future? How do we recapture and in some
respect, reconstruct our matauranga Maori and apply it to this process to enhance rather
than inhibit the outcomes? These and many other questions are a part of the journey ahead
-
for Ngati Rahiri and all Maori .4
4 Acknowledgements to Ngati Rahiri & Atiawa for their input to this section (Refer Personal
Communications, pp24 1 -242)
xx
Chapter 1 : General introduction
This thesis aims to produce a distinctive model for the horticultural development of Maori
resources, primari ly land, inclusive of tikanga Maori and indigenous production systems
based on the unique body of knowledge aligned to Maori . The integration of this
knowledge with western science will be argued and appl ied through the model itself.
1 . 1 Hypothesis
That miitauranga Miiori relevant to horticulture and pedology can inform and add value to
the fitture economic development of land resources.
1 .2 Background
Through whakapapa, Maori have an inextricable relationship to the land and natural
resources, one which identifies their connection to the land and which binds them to all
resources in several ways. The land along with the oceans, bush and forest resources, have
sustained the survival of the people through their abi li ty to provide food, shelter, spiritual
linkages and strength, transport and recreation. The provision of food is one of the most
important forms of sustenance because it provides for physical well-being, but all these
practices are important because, in Maori terms, the world is holistic and we cannot, and
should not, try to separate any one activity from another; they all impinge on each other.
It is well documented that under present conditions, Maori land is under-utilised by its
owners (MMOLDC, 1 998) . The contemporary definition of uti lisation differs in some
aspects from what Maori perceive as ideal based on their tikanga practices. Uti lisation
alone is not a basis for determining the value of land use; sustainable practices are now
expected to be an integral part of land management systems - including food production
systems. The reasons for both under-utilisation and unsustainable management are several
and become complex when discussed in relation to Maori land. Primari ly they relate to the
issue of multiple ownership, lack of investment opportunities, lack of [contemporary]
knowledge about the resource, lack of experience and/or skills and, isolation of blocks or
low land use capabi lities. (MMOLDC, 1 998)
A retrospective view of Maori land use would highlight horticulture as one of the most
important activities based on land management skills and providing for the physical and
spiritual well-being of the people. Historical [oral] records relate the importance of specific
food crops such as taro and kiimara which were introduced to this country through the
migratory actions of early Maori . On the arrival of European immigrants to the country,
Maori transferred their horticultural skills from subsistence level to commercial levels and
began supplying produce to new settlements around the country as wel l as some export
markets . This led to a thriving industry and related investment such as trader vessel
ownership until around the time of the ' land wars ' which saw their energy transferred to
supporting their own people in land retention.
Based on the retrospective view it could also be argued that Maori land use was applied in a
sustainable form during the t ime of European settlement. The combination of a small and
dispersed population and tikanga or cultural practices promoted this system of
management . With a growing pressure, however, to produce more from the same resource
and targeting new consumer groups, the same sustainabi li ty is not often seen today.
Horticulture therefore has had an important place in land use by Maori smce their
settlement of these islands . However, horticulture as an economic activity has become less
common for Maori on land owned by thems . The 2000 stat istics indicate 0.6% of the total
land in horticultural production in New Zealand is land in use by Maori owners or
businesses (MAF, 2007) . What can be done to restore the horticultural relationship
between Maori and the land? In response to this question, Maori landowners need to
incluqe the opportunities which now exist through the commercial and sustainable use of
their land to meet the present-day economic pressures placed on them as a people.
5 Personal Communication, W Sutton, MAF Maori Policy Unit - 6 July 200 1
2
This thesis aims to answer these questions with a view to faci l itating the return of Maori to
horticulture as an appropriate use for their land and one which can target the commercial
aspirations of Maori, thus acknowledging the economic opportunities for Maori . I t is
intended that a selection of three case studies be undertaken which can support the
hypothesis that horticulture is an economic land use for Maori land. Groups involved in the
case studies are identified through their common association i . e . whakapapa l inks, and wil l
have opportunities to participate in discussion groups concerning the issues surrounding
Maori horticulture .
Essentially the project is concerned with the empowerment of Maori as both a process and
outcome to utilise their own resource (land) in a fully economic sense. Empowennent wi l l
be facilitated through the acknowledgement of tino rangatiratanga6 for al l Maori involved
and the return of information to participants. Horticulture is simply the tool by which
uti lisation will occur.
1 .3 Case studies
Case studies were undertaken based on the fol lowing terms of reference which are drawn
from a generic interpretation of the subjective considerations applied to case study theory
(Hamel , et al. 1 993) :
• Land owner or group identities based on kaupapa Maori terms
• Land/activities identified which comes under the jurisdiction of the group
• Past developments and interests in horticulture are apparent
• Historical/whakapapa relationship to the land is apparent
Furthermore, an information gathering process, which identifies knowledge necessary to
make management decisions relative to the soil resource and horticulture, was undertaken
in support of the case studies. Information was sourced both from primary and secondary
written sources and from community (predominantly Maori) and industry informants. This
means the resources such as soil and climate have to be fully identified in order to support
6 Literal ly - chieftainship or sel f-determination - the abi l i ty to make decisions regarding ones own future.
3
the nature of the study . An awareness of the l ogi stical , t ime and skill constraints to
achieving a full return to horticultural production by any group under study I S
acknow ledged.
Three case studies were undertaken and are focussed on the following :
1 . 3. 1 Wakatu Incorporation (Contact: Richard Brown)
Located in Te Tau Ihu or the Nelson region of the South Island, Wakatu Inc. is a major
incorporation involved in the management of multiply-owned Maori land. Their business
includes horticulture, forestry and seafood. Horticulture is based primarily around Motueka
and includes kiwifruit and apple production, marketing and export. This is a successful
Maori incorporation providing annual dividends to its shareholders .
1 . 3. 2 Parewahawaha hapiilParewahawaha Marae, Bulls (Contact: Pita Richardson)
Several blocks of land are associated with Parewahawaha hapu and Marae in Bulls in the
Rangitikei . district. There is a h istory of horticultural land use however this has been less
common in recent decades. S ince 2003 , one block has been returned to production of
several vegetable crops including taewa, kamokamo, corn and pumpkins to provide for the
marae itself. The block is whanau owned but managed by marae trustees in accordance
with tikanga.
1 . 3 . 3 Tahuri Whenua Incorporated Society
Tahuri Whenua is a national collective of Maori vegetable growers including supporters,
kaumatua and kuia and non-Maori members who wish to be involved. The collective aims
firstly, to improve the presence and involvement of Maori in the vegetable sector, and
horticulture secondly. Currently (2007) there are over 200 members who participate in
forum and hui (meetings) throughout the year including education initiatives and support
programmes for general Maori economic development. The matauranga or traditional
knowledge aligned to horticulture and land is an important basis on which Tahuri Whenua
functions .
4
1 .4 Research objectives
The key objectives identified of this thesis are to :
1 . Describe the philosophical and cultural foundations for land uti lisation by Maori .
2 . Identify key factors of tikanga Maori relative to horticulture and soils
3 . Identify cultural indicators for Maori land utilisation
4. Identify the ' qualities ' of the Maori land resources under study
5. Develop a model framework based on tikanga Maori and SCience values for
horticultural util ity of Maori land.
6. Recognize the rangatiratanga of Maori land owners
This thesis is built on a unique set of contributing knowledge bases aligned to soils and
horticultural management. The format of the thesis intentionally follows science principles
in structure and presentation and some assumptions are made regarding base knowledge
surrounding Maori cultural factors and the science disciplines relative to soils and
horticulture .
1 .5 Chapters
The thesis is presented in independent chapters, each of which contributes to a discussion
relative to the knowledge systems which provide the basis for the argument of the thesis .
The presentation takes the following order and approach:
The introduction and chapter one provide the general introduction to the topic including the
hypothesis, some background information to the development of the topic and the key
objectives of the study .
Chapter two looks at the methodology used in thi s proj ect which was purposefully drawn
from several distinct methodologies to respond to the mixed disciplines under study and
also to seek recognition from two clearly divergent communities under study; Maori and
'Western' Science. This research was undertaken primarily using 'Kaupapa Maori
Research (KMR) ' methodology supported by aspects of participatory, ethnopedological
5
framework, social scientific theory and case study methodologies . At al l times the
methodology was used to ensure the rangatiratanga of Maori as a people .
Chapter three gives a very brief snapshot of the traditional practice of Maori horticulture
from its origins to the 2 1 st Century and the potential it now offers for the future economic
development ofMaori resources and the Maori community.
This is then supported by chapters four, five and s ix which focus on the matauranga or
traditional knowledge aligned to the soils resource and horticulture. The historical basis for
the perception of land is looked at through the traditional body of knowledge held within
the Maori community that is applicable to both soil science and soil management. In
modern scientific terms this knowledge can be interpreted as a form of ethnopedology.
This is supported by a review of the type of horticultural activities undertaken in traditional
and contemporary Maori society and how those activities have contributed to the Maori
economy and subsistence needs . There is a wide diversity of crops which were managed
under various levels of intensity; some in their natural environment and others in a wholly
cultivated environment. These crops are introduced in chapter six which reviews the
important horticultural plants that featured in traditional Maori society. They provide the
basis for a body of knowledge or matauranga aligned to traditional horticulture and which
is available within the Maori community for reference and/or appl ication in contemporary
times.
Chapter seven reViews decision systems based primarily on horticultural land use.
Decision systems are a pertinent component of the techniques land and soil managers might
apply to their assessment processes in the management of resources. This chapter
introduces both traditional Maori and contemporary decision systems used in the
horticultural and soil management fields. A s ingle case study is also used to indicate how a
traditional Maori decision system would have been appl ied to a crop production system
which contributed to the subsistence of a communi ty .
6
Chapter eight covers the three case studies alr ady introduced. Each case study targets a
different land management entity and helps Maori land owners to exp 10it the role of
cultural tools in soi ls assessment and horticulture supported by their applicat ion in real
scenarios. Each case study looks at the application of a cultural layer to the assessment of
Maori land for a potential change of land use to commercial production of taewa, inclusive
of cultural management inputs .
Chapter nine introduces the proposed framework/model for the assessment of Maori land
resources based on the Maori knowledge introduced in the preceding chapters and science
principles . This is followed by a di scussion on the model and the contribution of
matauranga Maori and contemporary knowledge to the assessment approach . The abi l i ty to
apply a cultural layer drawn from a body of knowledge not previously included in decision
models relative to land uti l i ty in New Zealand is the key point of difference with the model .
The model i s also discussed from the perspective of its beneficial role for future use by
Maori and how it can be continuously refined to meet the needs of Maori land owners .
This is then followed by a conclusion to the thesis and full l ist of references and
communications relevant to the study.
The map presented on the following page (Figure l . 1 ) gives an indication of the location of
sites, tribal areas and settlements mentioned in this thesis and i s provided for reference
purposes .
7
Figure 1 . 1 : Map of Aotearoa New Zealand indicating places and local ibes introduced in the
text of the thesis
•
Kaitaia
Te Tai TORerau
(locality)
Kaipara
WaiuRu
T ainuil WaiRato locality
Whaingaroa, Aotea &
Kawhia Harbours
Ngati T ama, Ngati Mutunga
Atiawa Ri T aranaRI
Ngati Rahiri hapu
Manulwrihl Pa
ParihaRa
Pateo; Nga Rauru iwi
Wanganui (& locality)
Parewahawaha morae, Bulls
Horowhenua
Koanga-umu, Titahi Bay
MotueRa
Atiawa Ri te' Tau Ihu
WaRatu/Nelson
Waimea Plains
Karamea
West Coast
Mawhera Inc
Greymouth
HORitiRa
/llgai Tahu
region
T e Reinga (North Cape)
Doubtless Bay
Bay of Islands
Whangarei
AucRland
Incl. Otuataua &
Papatoetoe
Mercury Bay'
Mayor lslana (T uhua)
Whangamata
Firth of Thames
Mt Maunganul
Rotomahana
WhaRatane
HaWRes Bay
(Iocafity)
Kapiti Island
Pall iser Bay
Marlborough Sounds
Queen Charlotte Sound
D'Urville Island (Rangitoto)
KaiRoura
Kaiapoi
BanRs Peninsula
Wairewa (LORe)
Otago Region
MurihiRu Oocality)
RaRiura/Stewart Island
(Includes Mutton Bird Islands)
8
Chapter 2 : Methodology
2.1 Introduction
E kore e piri te uku ki te rino, ka whitia e te ra
Clay will not cling to iron when the sun shines7
(Te Whiti 0 Rongomai, Parihaka, 1872)
Researchers are held accountable for the processes and procedures used in the pursuit of
their findings . The ' research design ' wil l ensure accountabil ity, repeatability and unbiased
results (Krippendorff, 1 980) . It accounts for the way that data were obtained, how it was
mariaged, analysed and interpreted, and the instructions in order for the results to be
replicated (ibid.) .
The overal l o r homogenous methodology used in this project was purposefully drawn from
several distinct methodologies to respond to the mixed disciplines under study and also to
seek recognition from two clearly divergent communities under study; Maori and 'Western'
Science. This research was undertaken primarily using 'Kaupapa Maori Research (KMR) '
methodology supported by aspects of participatory, ethnopedology framework, social
scientific theory and case study methodologies. At all times the l10H�V6'-'J..l�·':",", 11lethcdclogy
was used to ensure the rangatiratanga8 of Maori as people and as iwi/hapwwhanau was
maintained and that the information gained was treated in the appropriate manner.
Where Maori values and science come together for the 'creation of knowledge ' or practise
of scientific processes, these discipl ines do not normally meet the expectations from a
cultural perspective. That is, they do not necessarily incorporate the values or
epistemology of Maori - as a people or culture - into the methodology. Depending on the
expected outcome or process of research, this may have an important effect on the whole
project. The main concerns Maori have with a solely Western scientific research approach
include the fol lowing:
7 This whakatauaki spoken by Te Whiti is metaphorical, meaning that Maori (clay) and Pakeha (iron) require
a common bond which is ostensibly the money focussed society (moisture); without it the bonds would
evaporate! - alternatively; ' the old cannot hold with the new without a common l ink ' .
8 Rangatiratanga - li teral ly ' chieftainship ' or general ly ' self-determination'
9
•
•
Concerns regarding the impact of research on their lives. These concerns focus on the
locus of power and control over research issues such as initiation, benefits,
representation, legitimation and accountability (Bishop, 1 996) .
The Western scientific approach to research has distanced Maori participants from
participation in the construction, validation and legitimation of knowledge. As a result,
Maori have become increasingly concerned about who will directly gain from the
research. Traditionally Western research has utilised an approach where the research
has served to advance their own interests, concerns and methods, with other benefits
being of lesser concern (Durie, A, 1 998 ; Durie, M, 1 998 ; Bevan-Brown, 1 998 ; Henry,
2000).
Dr Michael Walker ( 1 994) of Auckland University, in defending the role of Maori
knowledge in science disciplines, quoted the Oxford definition of science as a branch of
study concerned either with a connected body of demonstrated truths or with observed facts
systematically classified and more or less connected by being brought under general laws
and which includes trustworthy methods for the discovery of new truth within its own
domain. He determined therefore that Maori science does fit a definition of science and
should be seen as such . Indigenous knowledge in the form of matauranga Maori informs
Maori values and culture and therefore provides much of the basis for Maori centred
research.
2.2 Scientific theory
Science is about checking the formulation of concepts and testing the possible linkages
between them through observable phenomena. These concepts are the basis of variables
that form the hypothesis underlying scientific studies (Hoover & Donovan, 200 I ) . The
process of creating reliable variables from concepts and constructing the hypothesis from
them is a key aspect of science, especially social science; from the hypothesis a suitable
methodology can be promoted (Harnel, et aI, 1 993) .
1 0
Research based on observable evidence contributes to reality, but much of science is based
on theory . The point of science is to develop a set of theories to explain events within a
range of observations (Hoover & Donovan, 200 1 ) . In science, theory achieves several
things including a pattern for interpreting data, linkages between studies, frameworks and
wider interpretations (ibid.) . There are two general modes in which theory is engaged in
research: inductive or built through accumulation and summation of a number of enquiries
and, deductive or using the logic of theories to generate propositions which can then be
tested. I nduction is more reflective and l ikely to incorporate or identify values which can
impose on the research whereas deduction is reductionist and generally applied to western
scientific behaviour in the course of enquiry.
2.3 Applied science
Western Science has become the dominant science approach throughout the world. I t is
based on investigation, originality, discussion and accessibi l i ty. Chalmers ( 1 999) states
that scientific knowledge is proven knowledge, derived from rigorous observation and
experiment, and based on what we can see, hear and touch . Some theorists distinguish
between science and technology arguing that technology is derived from the theoretical
sciences . Science is however, inclusive of technology because this is primarily just a more
practical interpretation of theoretical practices (Lindberg, 1 992).
The belief that ' (Western) scientific' knowledge is the only valid form of knowledge is
cal led positivism (Bums 2000) and is a widely held view. The use of hypotheses to prove
scientific theories as right or wrong is also widely undertaken and forms one of the basics
of research science. Western science is believed to be undertaken without any bias or
preconceived expectations and the methods used have to be repeatable and acceptable to
the science community .
The Western scientific process has boundaries which must be adhered to , must also be
repeatable and must therefore be undertaken using a methodology which meets all these
parameters. The methodology used is a lways aligned to the hypothesis or expected
outcome(s) in science. In Western science, research often favours the researcher in the first
1 1
instance and then favours other groups or participants as secondary outcomes. Commonly
it is what is known as a quantitative methodology based on the process and results being
quantifiable through accepted processes e .g . , statistically or treatment differences .
The application of western science methodologies in isolation of indigenous conceptual
approaches in disciplines aligned to ethnopedology, ethnoecology or similar studies would
be inappropriate, especial ly if the projects are focussed on obtaining indigenous knowledge.
Some value exists however for the credibility which can be drawn from the boundaries and
repeatabi lity of western science and for the recognition these factors of research may bring
to any project. Thus a homogenic or all-inclusive approach is needed which can be tai lored
toward the specific project under study.
2.4 Kaupapa Maori methodology
Kaupapa Maori research methodology is based on a growmg consensus that research
involving Maori knowledge and people needs to be conducted in culturally appropriate
ways. These ways must fit Maori cultural preferences, practices and aspirations in order to
develop and acknowledge existing cultural ly appropriate approaches in the method,
practice and organisation of research (Durie, A, 1 998 ; Durie, M, 1 998 ; Bevan-Brown,
1 998 ; Henry, 2000). This research process covers a myriad of research approaches with
varying orientations and emphases but with a common thread relative to Maori
development (Bevan-Brown, 1 998) .
Kaupapa Maori research should be undertaken by people with the necessary cultural skills ,
involve the Maori community of interest throughout, be accountable to that community,
and eventually the research findings should be shared in a way that is culturally appropriate
and will contribute to their empowerment ( ibid. ) . This last expectation by the community
requires Maori centred research to contribute to progress and development and creates an
expectation not generally applied to other research approaches (Durie, A, 1 998) . Publicly
funded research, e.g. that funded in New Zealand by FRST (Foundation for Research,
Science and Technology) may build a similar outcome relative to progress and
development and thus may be becoming more responsive to some needs of communities
1 2
-
such as Maori . There is now a requirement in many research programmes funded through
the publ ic purse to be inclusive of Maori objectives which are responsive to Maori needs
and aspirations as a community.
Kaupapa Maori methodology challenges the dominance of traditional, individualistic
Western research that primarily benefits the researcher. In contrast, Kaupapa Maori
research is col lectivistic and is oriented toward benefiting all the research participants and
their col lectively determined agendas (Bishop, 1 996) . Henry (2000 :2 1 ) adds that kaupapa
Maori centred research challenges the status quo in the academic community in New
Zealand and cal ls for (among other things) 'power-sharing in the process of knowledge
construction, its dissemination and the consequent ownership and uses of the knowledge
produced' , a role in the de-colonisation of Maori and a space for the ongoing growth of
Maori scholarship .
Three principles are particularly applicable to a Kaupapa Maori centred approach to
research. The first principle is enablement including enhancement, or empowerment of the
community involved. Any research activity should aim to enhance the people. Integration is
the second principle, and it recognises the holistic view of life Maori have. The third
principle, Maori control, places importance over research which involves Maori as subjects
or which investigates aspects of Maori society, culture or knowledge. Inherent in this
principle are the issues surrounding intellectual property rights, guardianship (of things
Maori by Maori), and exploitation (of Maori by unscrupulous researchers) (Durie, M,
1 998). Joint ownership of research programmes has been recommended so full
participation of groups can occur. Table 2 . 1 introduces the key components of a kaupapa
Maori type approach to research.
If an inappropriate research approach is adopted when working with Maori, senous
problems can arise. This includes the reluctance of Maori to divulge information in the
future if they believe the knowledge they have shared has been misused or benefited the
researchers [solely] instead of themselves. This problem of misuse of indigenous
knowledge is prevalent with many indigenous peoples overseas, where for example, grain
1 3
crops that they have cultivated for thousands of years have recently been patented by
Western scientists (Benjamin, 1 997) . The question of cultural ethics has also been raised as
part of the kaupapa Milori approach to research. Primarily these ethics are based on tikanga
or good cultural practice including, aroha ki te tangata (respect), kanohi kitea (face to face
interactions), titiro, whakarongo, k6rero (look, listen, speak), manaaki ki te tangata
(generosity) and more (Powick, 2002).
Table 2. 1 : A Milori Centred Research Framework
Purpose of research 1 . Gains for Milori,
2 . As Milori
3 . To advance positive Milori development
Practice of research 1 . Active Milori participation
2. Multiple methodologies
3 . Measures relevant to Milori
The Practitioner 1 . Milori researchers
2 . Interim solutions
3 . Competencies
The Politics 1 . Treaty ofWaitangi
2 . Milori and i wi
3 . Funding
Adapted from Durie, M, 1996a
Also, Milori may not be able to understand properly if the research approach is too
technical, and it would be an improvement if the researchers use language that both parties
can grasp, in order to obtain the correct information. Conversation-like, informal interviews
may obtain significantly more useful information than rigid, formal interviews (Royal,
1 993) .
In recent years there has been a move to a more integrative approach to research where
Milori are involved, especially in the social science disciplines, with a more acceptable
relationship between the researcher(s) and researched and also shared outcomes. In the
science based disciplines an integrative approach has yet to be fully embraced. This issue
is slowly being addressed and the science community is starting to seek answers in an
integrative approach to projects with a clear Milori interest and there is potential in the
future for this to flow through to other science disciplines.
14
2.5 Participatory research approaches
The ' participatory' or ' participant-observer' methodology is described by Adams &
Schvaneveldt ( 1 99 1 ) as the methodology best app lied in anthropological research, though
their experience does not include researching with Maori as a cultural unit. They defme the
'observer' in this methodology as illlplying the researcher is located in an intimate
relationship with the [research] subjects. Wuest et a!. ( 1 999) describe the end-user
participation in participatory research as that of an ' intellectual partner' , involved in
establi shing objectives, selecting methodologies and interpreting results. Kessler (2007)
considers that participatory research tools on their own tend to be driven in a top-down
approach and do not allow full control by the communi ty under study. Ryder (2003)
concluded that a participatory approach to research was particularly relevant in soil science
and ethnopedology due to their localised applications .
In the context of researching under a kaupapa Maori methodology, this is a key factor in the
successful outcome of the research and it is expected that a strong relationship between
parties will develop over time. It will contribute through processes recognised as
whakawhiti korero (exchanges of dialogue), whakawhanaungatanga (ongoing
relationships), and kanohi kztea (visibi li ty) by the Maori community (Durie, A, 1 998 ;
Bevan-Brown, 1 998) . A weakness of the participant-observer method is the tendency to en
toward subjectivity and sympathy in any interpretation due to the personal involvement of
the researcher (Adams & Schvaneveldt, 1 99 1 ) .
Data col lected under the participant-observer method is often classified as unobtrusive data.
The process is recognised as a prolonged period of intense social interaction between
researcher and the subject, in the mil ieu of the latter, during which time data (often in the
form of field notes) may be unobtrusively and systematical ly collected (Adams &
Schvaneveldt, 1 99 1 ) . The primary tools appl ied consist of watching, asking questions and
listening. The interpretation of the data would necessari ly be undertaken in a cultural
context with the assistance of cultural experts where appropriate.
1 5
The Participatory Action Research model (PAR) [or its variants] has also been applied to
the mix of methodologies in th i s project. Whyte ( 1 99 1 ) defines PAR as a methodology in
which the community involved in the study actively participate with the researcher
throughout the process, from the initial design to the presentation of results and discussion
of their action impl ications. PAR contrasts sharply with the most common type of applied
research in which researchers serve as experts, designing the project, gathering the data,
interpreting the findings and recOlmnending action to the community. Okali et af.
( 1 994:4 1 ) elaborate further stating:
' . . . underpinning participatory research is a distinction between quantitative and
qualitative approaches in applied science. The debate on methods is often reduced
to a dichotomy between quantitative versus qualitative studies and techniques, and
statistical versus non-statistical approaches. The objective of these discussions is to
break the link between what is understood as 'research ' and positivist science ',
and they argue for a rejection of any assumption of the neutrality of the scientific
method. '
Variants of PAR include Farmer Participatory Research (FPR) which revolves around three
key parts; the distinction between qualitative and quantitative techniques and approaches,
the engagement of a participatory process concerned with enhancing self awareness and
analytical skill for the community and an emphasis on community participation and control
(Okali et al . 1 994) . Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) as a methodology is intended to
help communities mobilise their human and natural resources to define problems, consider
successes, evaluate local capacities, prioritise opportunities and create a means for
community self-help initiatives . It is better suited to third-world type communities than
indigenous groups (such as Maori) because of the assumptions built in regarding the low
level of skill and development each community holds (Frankenberger & Coyle, 1 993) .
Chalmers ( 1 992) describes PRA as a family of approaches to enable rural people to share,
enhance and analyse their knowledge of life and conditions.
2.6 Ethnopedology framework
This research has its foundation in traditional Maori horticultural practices and values; thus
it has an ethno-botanical, ethno-pedological or ethno-horticultural base. This then
contributes to a largely applied science approach using the information gained. Berlin
1 6
( 1 992) states that ethnobiological research, his own discipline, is by its very nature
collaborative research and is not undertaken in isolation. Ethnobiology is seen to be a
discipline which combines the intuitions, ski l ls and biases of both the anthropologist and
biologist (ibid. p3) . Utilitarian versus intellectual arguments in ethnobiology form part of
the dichotomy in anthropological theory (ibid, p 1 1 ) and can be identified as cultural
particularism and relativism versus cross-cultural generalisation and comparison;
essentially a focus on one culture in contrast to a generic approach.
Berlin ( 1 992) claims that :
( . . . human beings everywhere are constrained in essentially the same ways - by
nature 's basic plan - in their conceptual recognition of the biological diversity of
their natural environment. In contrast, social organisation, ritual, religious
beliefs . . . are constructed by human society. ' (pg 8) .
The relativist view in interpretivist and post-modernist approaches to anthropology adopts a
non-scientific position that cultures are different in manifold, if not innumerable ways. The
relativist person wil l look to show how the ethnobiological knowledge of a particular
society contributes to the complex socio-cultural variation of that society.
In contrast - the comparativist, while recognising the broad range of interlintra-cultural
variation in society, seeks to discover and document general features of cross-cultural
similarities that are widely shared. This aligns better to the systematists among us who
hold that biological species are real, regardless of classification (Berlin, 1 992) .
Researchers in the discipline of ethnobotany identify their role as targeting at least one of
three ideals (Given & Harris, 1 994 :9) :
1 . Rescue missions - aligned to a culture near extinction. This inCludes the systematic
recording of ethnobotanic knowledge.
2 . Industry investigations - the relationship between plants and commerce, and
3 . Cultural enhancement - aligning science and culture where possible.
1 7
By their very nature, ethnobiology, ethnobotany and ethnopedology must be participatory
at the very least as they involve both ecology and living cultures. Their science IS a
combination of studies around people, plants and land: each unique in its own way .
A conceptual approach to ethnoecology and ethnopedology was originally presented by
Toledo ( 1 992) and refmed in 2000 (Toledo, 2002) . It is based on three components as a
framework for working with indigenous peoples and knowledge. These are: Kosmos, the
peoples worldview, perceptions and beliefs, including their symbols; Corpus, the
representation of symbols and signs, primarily ' local ' or indigenous knowledge, and
Praxis, the practical implementation of the corpus of knowledge (Toledo, 1 992) . Critical to
all three are the linkages between them, i . e . the kosmos informs the corpus that guides the
praxis (WinklerPrins, 200 1 ) . Up to this time, most research of this nature has focus sed on
the corpus of knowledge, with few studies l inking the corpus with praxis and even fewer to
the kosmos; therefore often neglecting the consideration of the indigenous body of
knowledge (ibid. ) .
2 .7 Case study methodology
Yin (2003) defmes the case study as : an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary
phenomenon within its real life context, especially when the boundaries between
phenomenon and the context are not clearly evident (P 1 2). Furthermore, he notes that
multiple case studies can be undertaken and used to compare the simi larities and
differences between cases (Yin, 1 994) and that evidence drawn from mUltiple case studies
is often considered more compelling and the overall study may therefore be considered
more robust (ibid. ) .
The use of a case study has become an accepted qualitative method in certain research
disciplines . Hamel et af. ( 1 993) argue that the case study is an approach rather than a
method and that as an approach it employs various methods including interviews,
participant observation and field studies. In an anthropological study it allows the
researcher to undertake a monographic study from which generalised conclusions can be
drawn and discussed (ibid.) . The Chicago School in Sociology further created a distinctive
1 8
-
approach to case studies which surfaced in the 1 930 ' s fonning a lTIOre i nductive approach
to the research favouring on-s i te observations, open-ended i nterviews and the col lection of
documents to accompl i sh their goal (Harnel et al. ( 1 993) .
The use of case studies has now become an exploratory investigation gIvIng nse to
processes that can validate or eliIninate a theory or general model . The approach draws
criticism from some researchers for its lack of representation of the issue or social
phenomenon under study and its lack of rigour in the collection, construction or analyses of
empirical Inaterials, potential ly introducing bias to the process (Hamel , et al. , 1 993) . The
value of this representation needs to be defined in the objectives of the study to ensure it is
s ignal led from the start .
With reference to the perceived lack of rigour, this perception often results from the
subjective nature of the research based on observations, thoughts, or cultural world-views
of both informants and researcher. However, these components of the field studies along
with documented data allow the researcher to remain somewhat aloof and remain focused
on the hypothesis . Chapoulie ( 1 987 :276) noted that the comparative approach to case
studies by researchers :
'not only permits field researchers to take an objective point of view toward their
activities and thus exercise certain control over them, it also allows them to avoid
established representations of the subjects they study, especially those associated
with their familiar everyday points of view. '
The case stuciy therefore is an in-depth study or investigation based on a wealth of
empirical materials primarily of a broad variety. It has particular value where it is
constructed to meet the obj ectives of an explicit study and can contribute an inherently
sociological approach to the object of study.
2.8 Data collection
Yin (2003) identified SIX sources of evidence usual ly presented in a case study;
documentation, archival records, interviews, direct observations, participant observation
and physical artefacts. A mix of sources has been applied to the data collection process in
1 9
the c a s e s t u d i e s fo r t h i s t h e s i s . P ri m a r i l y , i n fo r m a l i n t e r v i e w s w i t h v a n o u s M a o r i
i n fo r m a n t s s u p p o rt e d b y o b s e rv a t i o n , e i t h e r d i r e c t o r a s p a r t i c i p a n t s , h av e b e e n u n d e r t a k e n
t o a s s i s t i n d e t e rm i n i n g t h e p e r c e i v e d a n d c u l tu r a l a l i g n m e n t o f t h e M a o r i c o mm u n i ty t o
h o rt i c u l t u r e . A s i g n i fi c a n t am o u n t o f t h e k n o w l e d g e d r a w n o n h a s b e e n p r o ffe r e d fo rm a l l y
a n d i n fo rm a l l y t o t h e a u t h o r o r a s s o c i a t e s o v e r m a n y y e a r s o f i n t e r a c t i o n s a t h u i o r
t r a d i t i o n a l g a t h e r i n g s a n d o t h e r o c c a s i o n s w h e r e c o n t ac t h a s o c c ur r e d . W h e r e p o s s i b l e t h e y
h a v e b e e n r e fe r e n c e d a s p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n s b u t o ft e n t h e y h a v e b e e n g i v e n u n d e r t h e
consensus of several people rather than one alone. Culturally, Maori have a strong belief in
an intergenerational transmission of knowledge, acknowledging that no single process of
learning will provide all the answers for each individual in our community (Pere, 2000) .
Historical (archival) data or ' documents of the past' (Adams & Schvaneveldt, 1 99 1 ) from
both primary (e.g. diaries) and secondary (e .g. collated statistics or newspaper articles)
sources have also been drawn from to provide further insight into Maori horticultural and
pedological practices and expectations . The process of undertaking soil testing procedures
and environmental assessments can be generally described as using ' physical artefacts' as a
data collection process. Thus all six sources of data identified by Yin (2003) have been
utilised in these case studies .
A practical approach and application to the discipl ine of traditional Maori horticulture and
ethnopedology has also been applied as part of the data collection for this thesis. The
nature of working within a cultural group based in their traditional knowledge and seeking
in part to restore and revive that knowledge in an academic context is a daunting objective
in itself. During the process of pulling together the contributing parties to this thesis an
identifiable group became apparent through their continued interest and input to the project
and to their desire to take the outcomes back to their various communities as the project
evolved. This group was formalised in 2004 as Tahuri Whenua Incorporated Society and
continues to meet twice a year at hui designed to showcase Maori horticulture, both
traditional and contemporary (Tahuri Whenua, 2005) .
20
2.9 Maori knowledge and Maori science
The term Maori science i s a misnomer and seeks to compare Maori knowledge and
knowledge creation to that of other cultures . Science for Maori is a holistic concept that
sti ll works with and creates knowledge but has a much wider dimension to it. In a
traditional context, Maori knowledge or matauranga Maori was retained as an oral
tradition supervised under tribal or fami lial processes or tikanga (Royal, 1 993) . In
contemporary times there are i ssues with the maintenance of the oral tradition through the
competency of younger generations in the application of traditional knowledge and also the
conflict between different media by which knowledge is transmitted (ibid.) . In reference to
these traditional processes, Royal states : 'oral literature was recited continuously until it
was carved into the house of the mind ' (P2 1 ) .
The major difference between the Maori and western approaches to ' science' is the
inclusion by Maori of a worldview based on spiritual origins in their understanding of
knowledge. There are four dimensions within which Maori perceive themselves and all
resources; tinana, wairua, hinengaro and whanaungatanga - physical, spiritual, intellectual
and social or cultural. Through these dimensions i t is apparent that Maori science is more
than just knowledge but it contributes to the culture in several ways and carries other
responsibil ities such as whakapapa - a continuation of people.
In attempting to defme matauranga Maori, Royal (2004 :2) offers the fol lowing:
'Matauranga Maori includes a range of concepts which can be considered as views
or perspectives on th'e nature of knowledge and knowing. These views are
presented as an introduction to an epistemology of matauranga Maori and they
range from explicit knowledge codified primarily through the use of literacy
(matauranga) through to experiences whereby a notion of explicit knowledge is no
longer employed . . . '
Durie, M ( 1 996) argues that the relationship between Maori knowledge and Western
science is one of the main contentious i ssues for scientists . The understanding of Maori
views, beliefs, relationships and spirituality bound together is holism and forms the basis of
Maori science. It is the joining of the past with the present, physical and metaphysical ,
people and the environment. Durie then states that whi le these points may seem to
2 1
highl ight differences between the science practitioners there are several striking simi larities
as well ; the effects of unseen forces, for example tapu, in Maori science or the various
forces in physics such as gravity or torque; the processes of deduction used to reach
conclusions and; the development of systems to retain and retrieve the knowledge.
Marsden ( 1 992) identified the religious, philosophical and metaphysical attitudes inherent
in Maori culture as contributors to understanding Maoritanga (and matauranga) as a whole.
He correctly recognises that, for Maori having been brought up in the culture, their values
and attitudes are drawn from those experiences . While the experiences lack objectivity and
therefore recognition in an academic forum, Marsden continues, objectivity from his
cultural position is a form of abstraction or model and not the same as reality . Maori
knowledge he concludes, is a thing of experience and existence within a cultural mil ieu.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the polarisation of indigenous and scientific
knowledge is untenable and there is a greater sympathy for the view that indigenous
knowledge represents a complementary not competing set of knowledge, and that somehow
it represents a sense of additionality (Reij et aI, quoted in Briggs et aI, 1 998) . Roman et af.
( 1 992) stated that while the importance of indigenous knowledge is receiving attention,
most of the information about indigenous knowledge is oral patrimony from generation to
generation and is variable between tribes and regions . There is also prejudice in some
quarters that indigenous knowledge is against development (Hayashi & Wakatsuki, 2002) .
Western science has its origins in the Babylonian, Egyptian and Greek cultures from as far
back as 3000 BC (Lindberg, 1 992). These cultures were also based on cosmology and
cosmological speculation with a strong emphasis on astronomy and the power of unseen
forces - not unlike Maori beliefs and values still held today. Western science has evolved
from this time to the structured practice that it is today.
Modem 'Western' scientists are often quick to disregard other cultural sciences because
they do not understand them fully, yet the Western world, and in particular commercial
entities, are equally quick to attempt to access other sciences if they feel there is some gain
22
-
I I
to be made from it . This is clearly seen in medical science when scientists seek knowledge
about the properties of indigenous plants for cures and medicines. This situation shows a
contradiction in the acceptance of an indigenous science such as that of Maori by Western
scientists, yet it indicates that to other cultures there is some acceptance of the credibil i ty of
knowledge held by the indigenous peop le(s) .
Accepting that there is a body of knowledge associated with a culture which is an overall
science, this research looks at what aspects of this science are specific or peculiar to that
body of knowledge. As a result of colonisation, Maori have had to undertake a process of
understanding the practice of science from another cultural context. Cultural values are
very much part of the body of Maori science and contribute to the differences between
peoples understanding of what is and isn ' t Western and Maori science. The process of
science crossing a social and cultural divide can be long and slow. The differences in
language, history and social practice are not easily understood, but therein l ies the value of
education.
2.10 Chapter summary
The methodoiogy applied to this research is a homogenous mix of kaupapa Maori, case
study, social scientific theory and participatory methodologies inclusive of an
ethnopedological framework centred on a kosmos-corpus-praxis triad. The research is
inclusive of variants of indigenous knowledge including matauranga Maori where it is
aligned to Maori . The case studies are undertaken to introduce and support the discussion
on the role of cultural factors in the assessment and utility of Maori land resources . All
three case studies are undertaken using an established process and uti lised the six sources of
data generally recognised as contributing to case study research. The outcome of the case
studies then provide a basis to discuss and justify a template for the utility of Maori land
resources in horticulture informed from traditional knowledge, contemporary scientific
methods and experience.
23
Chapter 3 : Maori and horticulture
3 . 1 Introduction
This chapter gives a very brief overview or snapshot of the evolution of Maori horticulture
from its origins to the 2 1 st Century . It is not easy to compare today to the past with regard
to horticulture but our understanding of the role of horticulture in Maori society and the
potential it now offers for the future economic (and sustainable) development of Maori
resources and the Maori community is imperative.
3.2 Maori and horticulture
Horticulture is not just the production of crops but also the handling of plant products ,
storage, seed retention, p lanting and so on; all the related activities which contribute to the
produce quality prior to consumption or utility. In Maori society, crops that were sourced
from the bush or uncultivated s ites were sti l l aligned to horticulture through the
management of the sites to allow for the wild plants to grow, access for harvest, the
handling of any harvested plant parts, and storage of produce.
For Maori there is, as with all indigenous cultures, a holistic9 approach to resources and a
very personal relationship between the people and the same resources . The whenua (land)
is the resource which sustains our crops and therefore sustains the people as wel l . Our l ink
to this resource is through whakapapa which is encapsulated in history. Whakapapa l inks
mankind to all resources through the primal parents - Ranginui and Paparuanuku - who
created the physical world that we live in and had many offspring - all atua or gods - each
responsible for different resources and phenomena. In the case of the whenua, it i s
represented by PapatUanuku - the Earth Mother - who nourishes and nurtures the young.
Her sons Haumia-tiketike and Rongo-marae-roa (sometimes known as Rongo-ma-tane) are
responsible for uncultivated and cultivated crops respectively. Another son Tane-mahuta is
the parent of the fIrst mortal being and therefore the parent of us as humans. This whanau .
(family/familial) relationship binds us to the resources and establishes a range of conceptual
approaches to resource utility and management. The spiritual relationship (wairuatanga),
9 Based on the (w)hol ism concept where the sum or value of the 'whole ' is greater than that of the parts.
24
hospital i ty (manaabtanga), the physical relationship and whanaungatanga, the social
relationship are al l aspects of the management and use of resources and define the
principles behind crop or food production .
The philosophical base from which traditional or indigenous gardens stem can be
encapsulated in whakapapa and tatai (layered or tiered knowledge) . Through whakapapa
and the relationships of the offspring of Ranginui and Papatiianuku we can understand the
interactions between organ isms, resources and phenomena. The interactions consolidate
the place of all these things - tangible and intangible within Te Ao Maori 1 0 . Tatai refers to
the orderl iness of the world, which exists for a purpose and can be seen, for example,
through whakapapa and its ordered approach. Thi s collective knowledge was retained and
taught by experts or tohunga in generations past. Buck [Te Rangihiroa] ( 1 954 :27 1 ) states:
' [this] teaching was referred to as the kauae-runga (upper jaw), in contrast to knowledge of
things terrestrial termed kauae-raro (lower jaw) '.
The tools of management for Maori horticulture are somewhat broader than those used in
other systems. The primary tool is whakapapa, i .e. the relationship to the resource
including the spiritual association. Second to tnis is tikanga - protocols or practices -
l i terally the right way(s) of undertaking a task. These are followed by the physical tools
such as the wooden and stone implements of old or the modem metal tools and beasts of
burden introduced by the settlers during colonisation.
The Maori world is often called a holistic world because of the intertwining of all the
activities and resources. Each action will ultimately impinge on the resources that provide,
sustain and support the people. Therefore all actions need to consider their consequences
and whi le the resources sustain us as a people they also need to be sustained by the people.
What results is a range of processes that provide input to the activity of gardening. These
include : karakia (prayers and incantations), tuhonotanga (joining together), ohu (working
together) kaitiakitanga (guardianship) & tikanga; all of which will be further elaborated on.
1 0 Te Ao Maori, - l iterally ' the Maori world'
25
I n addi tion, the concept of mauri or the natural energy or life force i s important to all
activities which affect our resources. It is a concept which binds and inter-relates all
resources to every other element in the natural order, including people - and to the spiritual
realm as wel l . Any activity that impinges on the health of a resource is said to be affecting
the mauri of the same resource and ultimately the health of those reliant on interactions
wi th the resource.
Durie's 'whare tapawha' model ( 1 994) introduces four distinct realms or planes which exist
for Maori - they apply to all things, living and inanimate, tangible and intangible. He
compares these realms to the four walls of a whare, each wall representing a different
dimension: taha wairua (the spiritual s ide) ; taha hinengaro (thoughts and feel ings); taha
tinana (the physical side) ; and taha whanau (family) . All four dimensions are necessary for
strength and symmetry and all influence and support the others .
They are:
Te Taha Wairua (spiritual well-being, including religious associations)
Te Taha Tinana (physical well-being)
Te Taha Hinengaro (intellectual, mental and emotional well-being)
Te Taha Whanaunga (social well-being)
Horticulture therefore is not just the activity of planting and growing crops; it is a process
that draws from other aspects of Maori life including:
• Manaakitanga - hospitality
• Wairuatanga - spirituality
• Whanaungatanga - social relationships
• Kotahitanga - unity
• \Vhakapapa - relationships/genealogy
• Kaitiakitanga - guardianship
• Turangawaewae - a place to stand and call ones own
26
3.3 Wbakapapa
All cultures and groups within cultures have their own way of seeing the world - they have
their own 'worldview' or 'paradigm' . To articulate the worldview of a culture is difficult
as within any group there will be changes and variations (NZIER, 2003). The way that
communities of people view the world informs the way they behave towards each other and
their environment, the values they hold, their customs and traditions . The parad igm in
science informs and organises theory and inquiry (Hoover & Donovan, 1 98 1 ) .
'The word [paradigm] comes from the Greek word paradeigma which translates
literally as 'pattern '. It is used in social science to describe an entire way of
looking at the world. It relates to a particular set of philosophical assumptions
about what the world is made of and how it works . . . The point about paradigms is
that they provide the landscape in which individual theories can flourish. Those
theories, within the paradigm, are subsumed under broader generalisations about
what the world is made up of, how it works, and how we can know about it. '
(Davidson & Tolich, 2003)
A traditional Maori worldview is based on whakapapa, or genealogy. Within a Maori
paradigm, whakapapa is how we know what we know about the world. As Kawharu
( 1 998) stated:
'Proof in Maori terms of gods and ancestors is denoted through whakapapa, a
genealogical recital connecting humans, their ancestors and the gods before them.
The whole universe is thus ordered in a systematic fashion. '
In non-Maori terms, whakapapa is generally defined in English as ' genealogy' (A line of
descent traced continuously from an ancestor; an account or exposition of this; the study
and investigation of l ines of descent, The Concise Oxford Dictionary, [Allen (Ed.) 1 990]) .
The definition of genealogy does not embrace the essence of the concept and application of
whakapapa in a Maori world. For Maori , whakapapa is specifically about who we are and
how we fit into and participate in the environment in which we l ive. It is a major task to
review the construct of the term whakapapa and its ' application in a non-Maori context.
Regardless it is important to consider the cultural implications of the term. In Maori the
term incorporates all the perceptions people have of whakapapa as a concept which has a
retinue of relationships to all the emotions, behaviours, beliefs and history - conceptual or
otherwise - which Maori as a people have.
27
Kapiti hono, he tatai hono
That which is joined together becomes an unbroken line
In general, whakapapa is considered to be the genealogical record of Maori history and as
such the link between Maori and the natural resource. In reality whakapapa is much more .
Keenan ( 1 994) describes whakapapa as intel lectual infrastructure.
whakapapa or genealogy, argues Keenan, is :
Conventional
'a critical element in advancing tribal histories as mediations of tribal narrative is
the definition of the process and framework, necessarily customary, through which
this [Miiori intellectual process} was achieved. The key to such processes and
frameworks was the continuing value to the tribes of whakapapa as intellectual
infrastructure. Such h istories were achieved, it is suggested, by tribes making use
of conventional whakapapa. Whakapapa is here advanced as providing the critical
infrastructure for all knowledge organisation. It was especially the most customary
method and pattern of arranging tribal narratives of the past.
The process of re-arranging tribal narrative into tribal histories would then have
logically followed the sequential framework of conventional whakapapa, given that
conventional whakapapa was one of its primary sources. ' (Pg 23)
Best ( 1 995) also aligns whakapapa as a basis for religion and mythology in Maori society.
He maintains that Maori have their allegorical myths contained within a cosmogonic
system to explain evolution. These myths are presented within a process of whakapapa and
contribute to society' s theological thought as well as their relationships to other members of
society and the surrounding resources. Whakapapa, Best maintained, is bound to at least
three sciences; cosmogony, theogony and anthropogeny. This view is supported by many,
including Roberts et af. (2004), who continue to identify commonalities between the Maori
cosmogonical whakapapa and that of various other Pacific cultures including the
Hawaiians, Tahitians and Cook Islanders .
Roberts et af. (2004) summarised whakapapa as a Maori mental construct essentially
meaning ' to place in layers ' and applied to recording human descent lines and relationships
as a genealogical construct connecting each papa or layer. Whakapapa is viewed as an
"epistemological framework in which perceived patterns and relationships in nature are
located". Pere ( 1 982) adds that whakapapa contributes to a process of social stratification
which depended on seniority of descent both vertically and collaterally . Debate continues
28
regarding the similarity between processes other cultures use to classify components of the
world around them such as plants and animals and the Maori cultural process aligned to
whakapapa.
Whakapapa is therefore much more than just a genealogy; it is the receptacle of knowledge
for tribal histories and Maori intellectual basis . Several terms in te reo Maori consolidate
this understanding. Within Te Atiawa, whakapapa is also referred to synonymously as
' tatai ' . This word refers to the order of the knowledge within the whakapapa, sequential as
is expected within any genealogy system and also elaborative as is expected within any
receptacle of history . Barlow (2002 : 1 73 ) differentiates whakapapa from tatai stating the
latter as 'signifying the order and structure of various domains ' and when it relates to
humans, as referring to 'the actual recital of genealogies rather than the system of
descent . . . ' whereas whakapapa is the 'basis for the organisation of knowledge in respect of
the creation and development of all things '.
It is the concept of whakapapa we are concerned with . In the beginning the creation of the
universe as we know it was defined by Maori through whakapapa. Walker ( 1 996) states
that the world-view of Maori is encapsulated in whakapapa; the description of the
phenomenological world in the form of a genealogical recital . He further states that
implicit in the meaning of whakapapa are ideas of orderliness, sequence, evolution and
progress . . . embodied in the sequence of myths, traditions and tribal histories. Roberts et
af. (2004) identify whakapapa as a mental construct or framework which creates patterns
and relationships in both human and non-human environments . The narratives which
accompany the whakapapa provide information, meaning and explanations for the people
and often explain why things are what they are and how behaviours such as tikanga
(customs or practices) have come about .
Inherent in the whakapapa relationship between Maori and the land (and other resources) is
the practice of naming places or contributing names to pepeha or whakatauaki (proverbs or
sayings) . The names are remembered in whakapapa and are often synonymous with
relationships and other important aspects of historical interest (Forbes, 1 996) . It is common
practice to apply names to s ites of particular util ity, including cultivation sites . Treasured
29
i tems, often including the products of cultivation e .g . hue (Newman, 1 903) were also given
names as were special trees and plants and important occasions including feasts.
Whakapapa is but one of the modes of transmitting history in Maori society . Maori
processes applied to recording history are primarily oral and usually undertaken by
narrative, prose, song (waiata) , proverb (whakatauaki) and whakapapa (Binney, 1 987) .
Roberts et al. (2004) note that the Polynesian oral traditions reveal a sophisticated
understanding of the world and their place in it. The oral process gives a purpose in Maori
society by providing a meaning for events and a validation for the whanau and hapu claim
to mana and knowledge or matauranga (Binney, 1 987) . It also endows a responsibility for
whanau members to retain, record and relate the history to future generations .
3 .4 I te timatanga (in the beginning)
There were three periods about which the universe was created. The fIrst was Te Kare in
all its various names ; the vast emptiness . This was followed by Te Po - again in all its
names; the long night. Both these periods have no specifIed time period. The third period
is Te Aa Miirama; the world of light and the one in which we now live. Within Te Po the
whakapapa culminates in the acknowledgement of a primreval being; Ranginui who later
begat Papahlanuku from within himself and then took to be his wife (Broughton, 1 979).
Ranginui is personified as ' the Sky Father' and PapatUanuku as ' the Earth Mother' . It is
from their close coupling that the cause of darkness was understood. Ranginui and
PapatUanuku were responsible for two main things : darkness through their coupl ing and,
light through their separation as undertaken by their own offspring. The union of Ranginui
and Papahlanuku was procreative and from it they produced 70 offspring . When they were
[mally separated the world of light became a reality . Papahlanuku said to her offspring that
she would provide sustenance for them. From this promise comes the reasoning why Maori
continue to dig into the earth to gain their sustenance, primarily aruhe and kUmara, but also
crops such as taewa and other root crops.
Each child of Ranginui and Papatiianuku was assigned to a resource or department in nature
(Broughton, 1 979) and their offspring and unions subsequently accounted for all other
resources . An example is Tane's union with Hine-tupari-maunga which resulted in
30
Parawhenuamea, the parent of fresh water and whose son , Rakahore, becarne responsible
for stones and rocks . Rongo-marae-roa (syn. Rongo-ma-Tane) and his brothers Tane-te
hokahoka and Tangai-waho were appointed as preservers and caretakers of the fert i l i ty and
welfare of forests and plant life . Rongo-marae-roa held the status over all agricul ture and
cultivation (not of harvest though, just of the preceding activities) and also with the practice
of peacemaking and the expression of hospitality, generosity and manaaki tangata. Another
brother Haurnia-tiketike held the same status over uncultivated food/crops .
Ranginui =1 Papatfianuku �I --------------------�
liru- Ie-n;.;;tn*tna ROI'r-cln�O __ --'r-_-'--__ -r ____ -r ___ -'
\"' h - ' . ( I ' ) R I - . ..1 . ( ' k T I \ ..J - \ , ..1. 1 - I ' I ' r 'l k[l � r c ro ' I ( . I y anul � ' cga o�go-n\:lul = . �an ... 1n;) 'U aro ! .w-po � .w- aw \IW 11 M ..... ren ... am\\ la
I : Colocaria Cnlysft!.''IJ1i Ti- ar.1 KI re
Ha 19a-Iti I }{mtILfc.\JI/(JJ1$ Uwhl ({)/(��((Jrt'(J FpJI . /
Figure 3 . 1 : Sample whakapapa relative to horticulture Source: Roberts et al. (2004)
An example of whakapapa as applied to horticulture can be found in Figure 3 . 1 (Roberts et
al. 2004) . This composite whakapapa shows how whakapapa creates both order and
knowledge and can be found in its various forms within matauranga held by various iwi,
hapu and whanau throughout Aotearoa! New Zealand.
Ko Rongomaraeroa te putake 0 te kai, 0 nga hua 0 te whenua.
Rongomaraeroa is the origin of food and of the fruits of the earth
Specific tribal whakapapa identifies the association of atua with various food crops . For
examp le Uru-te-ngangana, Rakataura and Haumia-tiketike are all important in their
significance as atua to the kouka or tii p lant . Their s ignificance is broad and ranges from
3 1
Uru-te-ngangana' s descendants being responsible for many of the qualities of kouka such
as its botanical habits, strength and so on . Rakataura is the son of Rehua, a son of Ranginui
and PapatiUinuku. Rakataura is the creator of moths which relates to the caterpillars which
feed on the leaves of tii . His wife Hine-po-iho and their chi ldren are responsib le for the
qualities of the tii leaves for its various uses . Haumia-tiketike, as the atua responsible for
underground food stores, relates to the qualities of the rhizomes of the tii (or cabbage tree)
plant which were used for cooking in earlier times (Simpson, 2000). This example
highlights the diversity and complexity of the whakapapa relationships in traditional Maori
society.
3. 4. 1 Maru
Maru-tangi-kai L L -Maru who cries for food
[Maru was a very j ealous and demanding god]
On the North Island ' s west coast the atua or deity Maru had strong associations with crop
production systems. Maru is said to have arrived in the Aotea waka as a spirit tendered to
by tohunga on the voyage from Hawaiiki (Buck, 1 949; Broughton, 1 979). Maru was a very
strict atua demanding specific behaviour from his adherents; as the local god of war he was
called through karakia or prayers and incantations supported by offerings such as cultivated
and uncultivated vegetables, fish or bird products . He was also called periodically to save a
failing crop through the same process of karakia and offerings .
3.5 Maramataka
ADO ko te marama kua Dgaro, kua ara aDO.
Just like the moon that disappears and rises again. 12
In earli er times Maori were total ly reliant on their understanding of the seasons and phases
of the sun, moon and stars to guide them through their dai ly activities. Theirs was a
subsistence l ifestyle and most activities were undertaken at their most appropriate time to
gain the results or products necessary to maintain survival. An example is the fisheries
resource which was exploited only during the most appropriate time in the season for each
variety of fish. Another example is the activities aligned to specific crops which would
I I Whakatauaki from Wanganui region
12 Translation taken from Mead & Grove, 200 1
32
onl y achieve good results at particular phases in their growth. This means Maori were
required to have the intimate knowledge of the resource and its own cycle so that their
activities could not create any potential harm to the same resource.
The maramataka Maori (Maori lunar calendar) i s one such tool used to create orderliness in
the daily lives of Maori and assist decision making and management processes. The
calendar is based on the moon and stars and was created through an intimate knowledge of
these things. Several versions of the calendar exist and mostly they all carry tribal
variations which acknowledge the independent tikanga of these groups 1 3 . The calendar is
used through reference to the moon and should be read as the first day being that directly
following the new moon on the Pakeha 14 calendar. It formed the basis of cultural life
before colonisation acting as an almanac for the start or cessation of various activities
(Roberts, et al. , 2006), especially in horticulture . The Maori calendar traditionally begins
with the rise of the Pleiades or Matariki constellation in the May/June period and ends after
harvest around May the following year (Best, 1 986) .
In support of the calendar are the concepts of seasons and lunar months (Refer to Table
3 . 1 ) . These were aiso basea on Knowiedge of the stars and moon however, they also
incorporated knowledge of the environmental responses or phenomena surrounding them
which were used as indicators . An example is the terms used to identify each season such
as Mahuru where the whakatauaki or proverb states ' kia pumahana te whenua} me nga
otaota} me nga rakau } in reference to the .earth (soil) and covering vegetation warming up
following the cold winter months or, the onset of the eighth month (Kohitateal January) as
Te weronga 0 te karaka (the time of the karaka fruit being red-ripe) . Note also that in the
Maori version of the seasons, each of the four seasons represents a three-month period on
the Pakeha calendar. Maori also recognise the winter solstice which was known as
Hikumutu and the summer solstice known as Maruaroa.
1 3 Comments made by several kaumatua & kuia, also, note prepared by Materoa Frew (Maniapoto), 2003 and
comments from Makuini Chadwick (Ngati Hine ki Tai Tokerau), 2006
1 4 In this context, 'pakeha' is a generic term meaning ' non-Maori .
3 3
An example of tribal maramataka provided by Atiawa is attached as Appendix 1 . It i s
supported by a selection of notes explaining the role of this particular maramataka in
horticultural activities and the basis for the 12 month calendar as i t is appl ied in a Maori
context.
Table 3 . 1 : Identification of seasons in Maori calendar1 5
Season
TakuruaJ Hotoke (Winter)
KoangaJ Mahuru (Spring)
Raumati (Summer)
Ngahurul Te Kohi 0 Autahi
(Autumn)
Sometimes;
Matahi-o-Rongo
Hikumutul Maruaroa
Notes ... .... . . , .
Comprises the months Pipiri, Hongongoi & Hereturi koka (Jun-Jul-Aug)
Takurua-waipu and Whaturua - both tenns for mid-winter
Comprises Mahuru, Whiringa-a-nuku & Whiringa-a-rangi (Sep-Oct-Nov)
' the digging and p lanting season' Note Ko-anga is in reference to the Ko a
traditional digging implement.
Comprises Hakihea, Kohitatea & Hui tanguru (Dec-Jan-Feb)
Hui Tanguru (Feb) - kua tau te waewae 0 Ruhi kai te whenua (Ruhi ' s feet
rest on the earth) . Ruhi refers to Ruhi-te-rangi, the child of Rehua (a star)
and Peke-hawai was responsible for all cultivated products and hence this
saying means the crops are set.
Comprises Poututerangi, Paengawhawha & Haratua (Mar-Apr-May)
Te Kohi 0 Autahi sign ifies the start of the cold period and fish moving from
the rivers to the ocean for spawning. Ngahuru also known as Te Ngahuru-
tikotiko-iere, meaning when the crops are gathered and food is plentiful
Paengawhawha (Apri l) is when crops are harvested and is sometimes
referred to as Ngahuru-kai-paenga; kua taka kai tonu i te mara (food is
prepared at the side of the cultivations)
Tenns applied to the winter and summer solstice
In modem times calendars are used not only to record the phases of the moon but also to
use as a diary or as a track of time in relation to holidays, anniversaries and so on. For the
pre-European Maori the calendar was an important tool in determining their activities and
was used in conjunction with a range of other tools to determine what and where activities
such as fishing should take place. Other tools included the use of matakite (seers) , tohu
(signs/omens) such as the flowering of plants or moulting of birds and other local
knowledge (Best, 1 986) . Dai ly l ives were for the most part orderly and based on the
light/sun i .e . , ris ing to work at sunrise followed by a meal mid-morning, rest, more work
and a second meal and then retiring in the early evening to sleep. Remember also that this
calendar originates in an oral culture, and was memorised and sometimes encapsulated in
waiata (songs), pakiwaitara (stories) , carvings and other artistic renditions rather than a
written or printed document. Therefore, the references to lunar stages of the moon or stars
1 5 Based on the Atiawa maramataka as suppl ied by nga kaumatua 0 Atiawa nui tonu
34
were important factors in ensuring the people were keeping to the right decisions. Again,
the activities associated with the calendar such as fishing and planting or harvesting are all
considered to be tikanga statements derived over generat ions as the best practice for the
particular tribe.
Table 3 .2 : Vernacular Maori terms for climatic characteri stics 1 6
Ao Cloud (aorewa - scud/moving cloud) - also daytime
Whenua-huka; hukarere Perpetual snow (waihuka - snow water)
Huka-papa Snowfields (huka-horo - avalanche)
Kopaka; hauhunga Frost (kopakanui - big frost)
Waiuka; hukapuri Solid water / thick ice
Huka-maro; pata-huka; hail
ua-whatu; hukakapu
Kotiti Drizzle
Konenehu Drizzl ing rain
Marangai; ua Rain (maroi - type of rain that soddens garments)
Puroro; ua-puroro; paroro Downpour or driving rain
Uapo Showery weather
Hau Wind, air (& various honorific names for winds in regions)
Haukil Dew, damp
Hauhau Cool air (currents)
Hatai Mild weather
Anu, anuanu Cold (upoko-papa - cold winter weather)
Marino, marinorino Fine weather, calm/sti l l weather (marino-tukupu - very fine)
Pun�hunehu; punehu Mist (or dust)
Umurangi Red appearance of sky - considered a good omen
Ka poutumaro te ra ' the sun stands upright as a post ' - midday
A watea; maruao Dayl ight
Maruawatea Broad dayl ight
3. 5. 1 Climate
Within the maramataka there is a strong correlation between the understanding of the
climatic input or weather upon the environment and horticultural activities. The Maori
1 6 Drawn from Shortland, 1 856; Beattie, 1 949 and nga kaumatua 0 Atiawa nui tonu
35
language has considerable reference to the c l imate through a broad range of terms appl ied
to different aspects of it. Table 3 .2 Ests some of those terms.
3.6 Whenua
The term whenua has several meanings. There is a general understanding of the term across
all tribes, and possibly a number of regional or tribal variances to the common translation.
Williams ( 1 992) records four distinct translations for the term:
1 . land, country (noun)
2 . ground (noun)
3 . placenta, afterbirth (noun)
4. entirely, altogether (adjective)
Ruakere Hond, in his draft Taranaki dictionary ( 1 996), confirms the regional lWl
understanding of the term whenua within Taranaki as:
l . the placenta of the womb (noun)
2 . the earth o r a large land mass (noun)
With a consensus across all tribes that whenua refers to land in general - aside from other
meanings - the appl ication of the word to the whole of the land resource is appropriate. For
the purposes of this thesis, whenua is taken to refer to land in all its forms. The basis of the
argument relating to the economic utility of the land will be specifically through the
knowledge and utility of the physical soil resource. Also included in the argument will be a
Gonsideration of the emotional relationship between the people and the land, the tangata
whenua, and how whakapapa is a tool for Maori to assist in acknowledging these emotions .
Darcy Nicholas (Te Atiawa, Ngaiterangi, Taranaki) wrote of his understanding from an
Atiawa perspective of the association between the people and the whenua as :
'Even though [they J are learning the Miiori language, they forget that nothing dies
in the Miiori world. Things merely move through different dimensions - the flax,
for instance, becomes a cloak of immense beauty. Those we love become part of the
beautiful land around us. This is our bond with the land. It is our ancestor and as
such, part and parcel of what we are. It has sustained the life of our people for
hundreds of years . . . ' (Nicholas & Kaa, 1 986 : 32)
36
Returning to the economic aspect of land, the Waitangi Tribunal has stated that: at 1840
each hapzi had rangatiratanga over it 's ' whenua - that is hapu were political units
exercising autonomous resource management (Pond, 1 997: 1 ) . They continue, stating that
as the economy of each hapu throughout Aotearoa was different, hapu relied on varying
resources to gain their l ivelihood; some marine, some forest, some for cultivated crops and
so on .
From an economic perspective, Maori apply a unique and specific set of criteria in their
attitudes to land. Ownership is collective or tribal as compared to the individual title
favoured by non-Maori in New Zealand. There are several classes of land identified by
Maori including take tupuna (ancestral), take tuku (gifted), take raupatu (conquered or
through conquest) (Durie, 1 998) and take whenua kite (discovery) (Forbes, 1 996). The land
contributes to tribal economic well-being in several ways; fiscally, physically and
spiri tually (NZIER, 2003) thus contributing to identity and security for future generations .
There is a primary role of the natural resources, specifically the whenua or land in the
economic success of the Maori community . Firth ( 1 972) wrote about whether the pnmary
influence on economics was the prevailing environment or the culture and circumstances of
the people themselves . His conclusion followed that of many economists, both historical
and contemporary. He wrote:
'Man himself is not denied all initiative, but emphasis is laid upon what Vidal
Lablache terms 'the sovereign influence of environment '. Ellsworth Huntington, for
example, places great stress on climatic conditions as the principle agent . . . . On the
other hand, workers in anthropology are prone to see in the culture-environment
relation a drama of mastery of man, not h is subjection. ' (pg 56)
This identifies that a geographical relationship of the people to the natural resources can be
seen in communities with a tendency for them to congregate near the sources of food
supplies. In rugged country Maori comlTIunities were limited and small while on the ferti le
plains there was a greater concentration of people (Firth, 1 972) . Ethnologists have
identified this distribution in pre-European Maori settlement (Shawcross, 1 967a) .
37
Aside frOlTI the agricultural and horticultural util ity of land, the raw materials of industry
were supplied by the forests, bush and swamps (Firth, 1 972) . Mineral resources exploited
freely for tools and other uses by Maori included:
• Black Kara (basalt) , varieties of greywacke used for adze blades, pounders and
sinkers (Firth, 1 972)
• Basalt and other volcanic stones for hangi stones
• Obsidian flakes (whatuaho) for knife like instruments
• Pounamu (greenstone) for superior adze, chisels and also ornaments
• Nelson argill ite or pakohi for superior adzes, chisels and weapons (Wellman, 1 962;
Potton, 1 986; Petyt, 1 999; Hunter, 2003 ; Mitchell & Mitchell, 2004) . Patete ( 1 997)
noted 1 4 recorded quarry sites on D 'Urville Island for Nelson argil lite.
• Sandstone (tuahoanga) for grinding
• Quartzite for dril l points , chipping and hammering operations
• Ochreous red earth or kokowai, used to paint the body and woodwork, also the
preparation of bird skins or on human remains (McCulloch & Trotter, 1 984) .
Usually found adjacent to graphite deposits e .g. at Pakawau & Coll ingwood.
B lue & white clays - also for painting and personal decoration
• Pakai or pitch - a relatively pure type of bitumen - used as a type of chewing gum
and as an article of trade (Hunter, 2003)
• The use of pumice materials for manufacturing bowls and plates
3 .7 Tikanga
He toa taua, he toa e waia: te toa ahuwhenua, he toa tuturu.
The cultivator of the soil is a greater man than the warrior
Tikanga is a unique cultural approach to management. It includes the conceptual
management approaches of kaitiakitanga or guardianship of the resource for future
generations, oranga or the health of the people, wairuatanga - the acknowledgement of
spiritual input to management and, whanaungatanga - the communal approach to crop
produ.ction and tasks.
The difference in management systems lies in the relationship of the people to the activity .
Maori - as with al l indigenous cultures - perceive a very specific relationship with the land
and any activities which impinge upon it. Their approach to horticulture or agriculture or
any other land-use aims to benefit both themselves and the resource. Therefore their
3 8
Inanagement activities are based on dual outcOlTIes : continuat ion of the special relationship
with the land or whenua and sustenance of thelTISelves as the people l iving on the whenua.
Tikanga is the noun that best describes the col lective n1anagement techniques developed
over time and used in producing crops or undeliaking any activity such as harvesting.
These techniques are the results of experience over time (generations) and are in effect the
'best practice' relevant to the group involved. Some people refer to tikanga as a form of
(cultural) lore. Examples of tikanga are : the reciting of karakia (prayers) to acknowledge
the gods involved with the activity, the characteristics used to select plant material for
regeneration, e .g . , klimara, an ordered approach to harvesting, and the hierarchy of the
workers involved in the activity.
A further alignment to the gods i s the posi tioning of taumata atua 1 7 , sometimes as mauri
stones. These taumata are a tal isman or medium for the god(s) under whose care the crop is
placed. They also provided a vis ible symbol of protection and ferti l i ty of the crop .
Tikanga concerned with tradi tional cropping systems is often generic. It is not common for
traditional Maori gardens to be irrigated or watered. There was a system of land rotation
with a maximum cycle of three years for crops, tamed seagul l s were used to keep pests
from the crops, and the burning of kawakawa (Macropiper excelsum) was used as a
fumigant for some pests and diseases . These are al l examples of applied tikanga in
traditional horticulture .
Another example of tikanga can be seen in the common practices relating to the planting of
taro (Colocasia esculenta). Different versions exist as to the origin of taro in New Zealand.
In Taranaki it is believed to have been acquired prior to the migration period from an island
known as Wairuangangana 1 8 . From there it came as cargo on the Aotea waka and because
of its specific origin was considered a food of the chiefs (he kai rangatira) (Hammorid,
1 924) . Certain practices or tikanga associated with the planting of taro include :
17 Taumata atua, conceptual ly simi lar to an alter representing the spiri tual realm or gods.
18 Wairuangangana is a name now lost in antiquity referring to an island somewhere in the Eastern Paci fic
39
• Only planting at certain phases of the moon (maramataka Maori)
• Adding gravel to the holes in which the tuber/corms were planted.
• Planting in October (Northland) to November (south to Bay of Plenty & Taranaki)
• Planting in separate gardens from the other crops .
• A lack of tapu associated with the planting procedures
• Pinching out the innermost leaves (rito) to promote tuber size
• Harvest from March (Northland) to April (south) after the main leaves have died off
• Produce stored outside on the open ground
(Best, 1 976; Matthews, 1 985)
Presumably these practices varied between districts, especially in their timing of application
and/or responses to environmental factors . Some actions such as pinching out the rito will
have been based on experience gained over many generations.
3.8 Chapter summary
The ro le of horticulture in traditional Maori society was extremely important as it was an
activity crucial to the survival of a people in a subsistence economy. Horticulture provided
for the practical elements of Maori society through both food and uti lity produce. Aside
from this aspect, Maori had an intrinsic relationship with the land and other resources on
which successful horticulture was dependant. This was expressed through whakapapa,
tikanga, maramataka and other actions . These expressions were informed from a base of
knowledge now referred to in contemporary times as 'matauranga Maori ' and held within
the community as a whole and also by experts known as tohunga. Within the community,
the application of matauranga in horticultural systems was achieved by various tikanga or
best practices, often pertinent to the location, wider environment or group.
This special ist knowledge sti l l exists, albeit in a l imited group of today' s Maori community.
The relationship between Maori and the natural resources, including whenua, is also
inclusive of a set of cultural values which is present in all Maori functions of today. The
knowledge or matauranga relevant to horticulture and related activities is expressed within
a cultural value-set and is the basis for the argument for an inclusive assessment model
relevant to Maori in the 2 1 st century. The fol lowing chapters wil l consolidate the type of
knowledge specifically associated with the horticulture sector and utiity of Maori land.
40
Chapter 4 : Te Oneone: Ethnopedology
4. 1 Introduction
'Maori tookfull advantage of the varying qualities of the soil . . . in many parts is of
exceeding fertility . . . on the other hand the clays of a part of the Auckland peninsula
and the pumice lands of the Taupo plateau do not represent such good soil for
agriculture. ' (Firth, 1 972 : 66)
The study of soil genesis as a distinct branch of science is relatively recent. In 1 862 the
German scientist FaIlou introduced the science of 'pedology 1 9 , which has now become
synonymous with soil science and distinct from the then practice of ' agrology' or practical
agronomical soil science (Buol et a( 1 973) . The Concise Oxford Dictionary now defines
pedology as: ' the study of soil, especially its formation, nature and classification '. (AlIen,
1 990 : 877).
For much of the last century soil science has been dominated by a technological approach
where soil has been considered as an object to study. In recent decades the return to a
holistic or broader vision of the soi l and its role in the landscape has emerged in what
Warkentin (2006) describes as:
' [tL.� t(;lis��.:, :.pproach is] the legacy of the ages and shares a direct lineage with
early Greek, Islamic and Chinese thought and is primary in indigenous cultures. '
This chapter will look at the traditional body of knowledge held within the Maori
community that is applicable to both soil science and soil Inanagement. In modem terms
this knowledge can be interpreted as a form of ethnopedology. Ethnopedology is defined
by practitioners as the study of ' local ' knowledge of soil and land management [pedology]
in an ecological perspective (WinklerPrins & Barrera-Bassols, 2004). WinklerPrins (200 1 )
notes that various terms can be used to describe ' local ' knowledge such as indigenous,
traditional, folk, rural peoples and the prefix ' ethno' and so on; local may be the least
contentious . Ethnopedology is considered to be interdisciplinary or a hybrid of natural and
social sciences and encompasses all empirical soil and land knowledge systems of rural
populations from the most traditional to the modem ones (Barrera-Bassols & Zinck, 2002)
including soil-plant relationships (Ettema, 1 994) .
1 9 Pedology from the Greek: pedon, ground + logos, word, discourse or science
4 1
Sandor et al. (2006) make the point that:
, . . . there are compelling reasons to become aware of the knowledge of soils among
non-modern [indigenous] cultures. One is that aspects of modern soil science are
derived from traditional knowledge. . . . indigenous knowledge is at the same time
the precursor of modern scientific understanding of soil, and the basis of parallel
systems of knowledge about soils in traditional cultures ' (P46)
They continue, ' . . . jilrther, cultures ' world views can jimdamentally differ. This
includes viewing soils and land use in different ways, though there are certainly
common threads' . . . . local soil knowledge can also provide long-term insights
about human responses to environmental change and uncertainties. ' (P47)
There is no doubt that Maori have a body of knowledge aligned to the land and soils and
utilised this knowledge in their everyday use and management of these resources. The
study of indigenous soil knowledge however has previously focussed on the African, South
and Middle American and Asian regions and cultures whereas Europe and the Pacific
hardly register in published l iterature on the discipline (Barrera-Bassols & Zinck, 2002).
Whilst indigenous knowledge related to the soils and other resources is both valuable and
insightful, it must be remembered that it is derived out of a need for survival and includes
internal and external factors such as political and social pressures. For this reason alone, it
differs in context to much western science and technology which has often been derived for
more commercial or philanthropic reasons. Research has also shown that many indigenous
groups now use a blend of modem and traditional methods in their soil management, but
the knowledge system is still considered indigenous (Ryder, 2003) .
The availability of large areas of fertile land to a relatively small population meant that the
management practices of the land resource by pre-European Maori were entirely
sustainable. The relationship of the people to the land along with acute observation and the
practices of kaitiakitanga (literally; guardianship or stewardship) resulted in a remarkable
awareness of the land resource in its entirety and the impact of any activity on components
of the same resource e .g . , the quality of the water affecting the plants and animals gaining
sustenance from it. The role of kaitiaki , determined primarily through whakapapa in a
cultural context, refers to the concept of guardianship over all things, including the
resources from which gardens are formed. It is said the resources of the earth do not belong
to man but man belongs to the earth (Marsden & Henare, 1 992).
42
4.2 Soils - lVlaori nomenclature
Maori were not generally l imited in thei r access to suffic ient land for horticu lture . They
also had a very keen knowledge of the attributes of the land resource i tself. This can be
understood by their knowledge of the d ifferent soi l types expressed in the names and
classifications given to the soils . The word oneone is the generally accepted Maori term for
soil or the soil mantle; aligning to the Engl i sh definition of soi l as:
• The upper layer of the earth in wh ich plants grow, consisting of disintegrated rock
usually with an admixture of organic remains (The Concise Oxford Dictionary,
[Allen, 1 990])
• The mineral, organic and b iological matrix that forms the upper layer of a great part
of the planet and in which plants grow (Hyams, 1 952)
• The natural weathered material in which plants grow and by which they are
supported and suppl ied with both water and Inineral foods (Brade-Birks, 1 962) and,
• Not just the topsoi l or earth that is cultivated but including any subsoi l layers
extending downward to the mineral rock material from which the soil has developed
(McLaren & Cameron, 1 994) .
The purpose of soi l classifications 1S to cissi�t �J.u;l1C.Li.lki.i1d to understand the evolution of the
soils resource and to recognise attributes as they occur in different places . Haskett ( 1 995)
argues that the modem scientific soil classification i s derived from a system of:
, . . . making observations and determining regularities in nature that are in accord
with common sense . . . starting with innate recognition of similarity and proceeding
by induction. ' (p 1 82)
All soil taxonomy draws on field expenence and the assignment of varying levels of
linportance to key features of the resource; the ongoing inductive process Haskett argues .
The following l ists (Tables 4 . 1 and 4 .2/° give the range of names given to different soils
and parent Inaterials by Maori and are by no means exhaustive and recognise the
observations which lead to the development of considerable knowledge on soil types and
situations available for horticulture :
20 Beattie, 1 949; Hochstetter [ 1 959] ; Best [ 1 976] ; Roskruge, 1 999; Wil l iams [ 1 992] ; Hond, 1 995; & various
other informants
43
Table 4, 1 : Maori nomenclature for soi ls
GENERIC
,,.
. " ., '
.,' �; c
SILTS
'. �
",
"
,. c"
>
',� . ' , �" .
:.$: �
CLAYS
,
j
,'.
"
'
' ,:
,�
,"
"
.
,
.' .
"
,
.,, -
. �
. ' ,",. �. �, "
�
SANDS " .
.
� >� � ��
,
,' .. '
"
:':"' ,.� " , . , ,
..
."
" .,
.· :h�:
. . '� ,
f·
�
.,
.�
"
"
..
"
,
".,
' ,'
Oneone; Papa
Paioneone
Paru, paruparu
Ihio
Papatua
K6k6wai (also Papakura)
PapatiHinuku; Papatahuaroa
Kenepuru; kerepuru
Kerepuru
Para
Parakiwai; one parakiwai
Parahua; oneparahuhu
K6tae, k6tao, k6tai (Waikato)
Hamoamoa
Kere; keretii, onekereru
Kerematua; kereta; kereru
Kerewhenua, kerewenua
K6tore
Pakeho
Keho
Matapaia
Uku, oneuku, [Hineuku]
Pukepoto
Uku-puia
Taioma; taiama; (m)6kehu
Oneware
Onepuia; one, tahuna
Onehunga
Onetai, k6tae
Onepunga
Onetea
TahOO ,
Oneharuru
Onepu
Makowa
General tenns for so i l or earth
Clod of earth
Mud, specifically a dark mud
Mud, especially in a swamp or bog
Uncultivated, virgin soi l
Red earth used for Karamea (red ochre) p igment
Honorific term for the whenua (land) including soils
S i lt, especially fresh al luvial deposit
Si lt; earth sodden with water
Sediment (Marakura - red sediment [Ngati MamoeJ)
Si lt; sediment from a flood
Alluvium
An alluvial silt soi l
Clay
Clay (kerengeo/kerepeilkurupei-clod or lump of clay)
Stiff or heavy clay
Yellow clay
White clay
White clay, also l imestone material
White podzol
A clay, baked hard and used as a stone for cooking
An unctuous type of clay, either white or b lue in colour
(used for soap)
Dark blue earth (clay) used for pigment
The c lay mud of hot springs, also mud pools
A white clay type earth used for making pipes
Greasy soi l
Sand; sand dunes (One - generally white calcareous sand)
Sea sand; mixture of sand and mud
Sandy al luvial soil
A l ight sandy soil lacking substance
Light coloured sandy, volcanic soi l
Sand, loose earth
Sandy loam - considered a very good soi l
B lack magnetite sand; sea sand
Indurated (hard) sand
44
LOAM Onemata, one ware A dark ferti le soil
Onematua Loam (sometimes used to refer to al luvium)
Oneparaumu A very dark fertile, friable soil
Paraumu Black soil , containing a lot of humus
Onetakataka A friab le soi l
. ' Onewawata A lumpy soil
Pungorungoru A l ight, loose soil
PEAT Rei Peat; sodden ground
"
Onekopuru An organic soil found in wet situations
VOLCANIC Pungapunga (also Purupuru) Pumice; pumice lands21
Tahoata Pumice - name used on the East Coast
Pungawerawera; pungatara Sulphur - name used in Wanganui/Taranaki district
1(upapapa, kUkapapapa Sulphur - names used at Rotomahana
Whanariki ; ngawhariki Sulphur - name used on the East Coast
-. , ... ,.
Onerua A reddish pumice sand
Tatahoata Pumice sand/gravel
Pungarehu Ashes
" �
Onekura Poor quality reddish soil
AMENDED Onetuatara A stiff brown soil needing amendment with sand or
SOILS gravel to suit kumara
K.irikiri tuatara; tuatara wawata Brown friable ferti le soil suited to klimara
Onek5kopu Gravel or very gravelly soi l
Onepak irikiri Soi l contain ing gravel (kirikiri = gravel)
, :' Kirikirikokopu A c lass of gravel , particles consistent in size
'.,
. " 1(irikiri; tuakirikiri Gravel , shingle (generical ly)
The classifications are based on a number of physical attributes including soil texture and
colour distinguished using the human senses; sight, smell, touch, and taste . These are the
most readily observable criteria that land owners and farmers use to differentiate their soils
(Ettema, 1 994) . Furthermore, additional information can be given to these categories based
on perceptual qualities and b iological indicators such as soil fauna e.g. earthworms and the
vegetation found growing on the resource, both as indicators of quality of the soi l resource.
A list of biological indicators of soi l quality identified by indigenous peoples outside of the
Pacific is given in Appendix 2 for comparison to Maori indicators .
2 1 Tainui & Maniapoto dialect. Also as spoken by Hora-ta-te-taniwha of Hauraki in 1 852 (Hogg, 1 963)
45
Table 4,2 : Maori nomenclature for soil parent materials
Kamaka; ko(w)hatu, po(w)hatu
lIohanga; hoanga; tuahoanga
Kotare, kotore l' • - . "
,.,.. ', '
Tunaeke , ,;,
,
Korna' - , , , ,'
Mata; tiihua; rpatatiihua ,
Moa .. l ."
,
'.
"
i� r
': f: •
"
,.' t- " �- "'-;'" ;-
T�ngiwai : > � "': ' '.;<' ><" ' . ' J " ,
Pounamu , ',; , � " , "';
Pakohi; pakohe
.
Wharo
'
,
,� 'rJO
N g�rahu; ng�re�u; k6nga
".
.
.. ..
"
. -:'
� " ' ,
�.
,.
�."-,,,�.
..
"
�.
,�',O
Kapowai
, -' '{
,
.
. . :
Kurupakar�; kurupaku
>, :, '. ,
Makoha <'t: >'" : .-: " • , cr :,.
Kupapahi ; ,: :tP , " '. " :
"
Rino; pJaronga; ptauau ; ,: 1 ,.
;,,"
Pukepoto
,
Mana-pouri; rpanaUri
N gahu; horete
Pakeho; pakehu
'<;
Kara ". of
Pungatara
.
. "
" ,j�: ';r' ..: 'i
- '
�, '
", . .. "-,,
"
.
,
.
, . . -
- ,-
J "
, , -l
, '�: j" j,:
"
Tahoata; pungapung� . - ' .� . , �',: .
" , " : .:
. ' .Rangito�o
. •.... . � ,: ," .- . ' -
One , ;- " ' , ' , ,� . ,
_. _� � '� , ,,,\:o�. �
Onepii' , . ' , . , . '. r
,r' ", >,};:,7; .;. ,+
}
" " "i.
Pakai :� '" , ,,'f.' ":' ,0',,:," �.�.
Nehu; pUnehu; pUnehuneh�
Kirip�a -,
}�irikiri; kerikeri; kiripobatu
Karakatau
; !;..: ,;: .-
Kongiliu , ,"' , " � .
Manapou; ¥1anawapou , ' ,
.
, �
. ', ..
,
'� .�'i': .
.
..
.
.t'
' ,
-,.
"", !'
' f
General name for rock materials
Sandstone
(matanui = coarse grained variety & matarehu = fine grained variety)
Soft white sandstone (Ohoka - white rock [Ngati Mamoe])
Sandy l imestone of the upper Wanganui River used as a grinding stone
Basalt
Obsidian (sometimes refers to flint or quartz used for cutting)
A bed of rock, pyrite, i ronstone
Bowenite-serpentine
Generic name for greens tone materials
Argil l i te
Fossi l coal
Charcoal or, coal dust (also, b lack pigment)
Petrified wood; charcoal embers
Si l iceous slate - used for polishing and boring pounamu
Soft slaty rock material
Pyrites or iron sulphate
iron
Blue iron ore or iron phosphate (used as blue pigment in Taranaki)
A type of b lack stone - (N gati Mamoe)
Sandstone, mar!, especially soft mudstone (sandstone, also onetai)
White tabular l imestone of Whaingaroa, Aotea & Kawhia harbours,
Mokau & Wanganui districts (also generical ly white clay or l imestone)
Blue-black rock types e .g. basalt ofWhaingaroa or argil l ites of Taupiri
Porous volcanic scoria
Pumice
Lava, especially black lava/scoria
A white quartz or calcareous sand
Black sand cons isting of titaniferous magnetite, common in Taranaki
Pitch, bitumen (Pakaiahi = fireplace made of clay)
Dust
Flint, chert, s i l iceous slate, jasper - primarily of the quartz varieties
Small stones « 30mm diameter); river stones
Small round stones used as shot
A sharp edged stone
A reddish or brown colour stone said to have been brought by the kaka
(parrot) in its crop from Hawai iki
46
An example is the presence of WTWl (Juncus spp.) growing on open ground, which is an
indicator of a wetness l i lnitation, at least for some part of the year, of that site22 .
An added cOlnponent to the nomenclature lies within the Maori language itself. As an
example, the term 'para 1 is defined in English as smal l fraglnents, sediment, ilnpurity,
waste or refuse. The tenn parakiwai used to define alluvial soils can be translated literally
as ' sediment carried by water' .
A good example o f a name attributed to terminology al igned to soils and alluding to a
historical event can be found in the name W AIUKU , currently representing a settlement
near Pukekohe in South Auckland. The name recalls the local stream (wai) which had
banks of white clay (uku) . A girl of high rank was said to have visi ted the locality to
choose a husband. She first met with a chief named Tamakau but he was not impressed
with her. His brother Tamakoe who was out in the kumara plantation was summoned. He
scrubbed himself with the uku or white clay, which was used as soap in those times, to
make himself presentable and met with her. She became his wife and the name applied to
the current settlement commelnorates this event (Reed, 2002) . Best ( l 995b) conveyed
another example in the naming of an historical event that took place at Pukekaroro pa,
Nukutaurua (Mahia) in pre-European times as KAI-UKU. Here the inhabitants of the pa
had been held siege by an invading tribe for some length of time. For the want of food they
eked out their scant supplies by eating uku or clay until they were at l iberty; hence the
name Kai-uku (Buchanan, 1 973) . Simi larly, the settlement of Whangamata near
Coromandel is in reference to the mata or obsidian pieces washed into the harbour
(whanga) from nearby Mayor Island, renown as a source of obsidian material s.
There are many other examples of the language terms actually holding more detail and
information than a direct translation implies . As with all languages, a direct translation to
another language does not take into account the culture and values implicit in the original
term or word. An interesting amalgamation of Maori terminology and soil science can be
found in relation to the gley podzol soils of the west coast of the South Island from North-
22 Common belief within Ngati Rahiri and Atiawa ki Taranaki .
47
west Nelson to Fiordland and the Mutton B i rd Islands which are known locally as 'pakihi '
soi ls (Aston, 1 9 1 0 ; McLaren & Can1eron, 1 994; Ashwell , 1 999) .
Mol loy ( 1 993 :232) defines 'pakih i ' soils as :
' . . . a particular type of wetland found on the west coast, generally flat or gently
sloping, carries a sedge/fernlrestiadlrushlmoss vegetation, occurs under a mean
annual rainfall of more than 2200mm and is underlain by wet infertile soils. '
The term 'pakihi ' in Maori is general ly translated as meaning an opening or c learing from
forest and generally of low fertil ity. These Westland soils are mostly swampy terraces of
minimal fertility, carrying vegetation such as wire rushes, tangle fern, sphagnum moss and
manuka and typically difficult to establish in agriculture or forestry use (NZFS, 1 959 :
Prickett & O'Byrne, 1 972; Molloy 1 993) .
N iemeijer & Mazzucato (2003) recognised the relat ionship of a body of knowledge that
informs the actual indigenous taxonomy of soils . This body of knowledge is partly
identified as the theories land owners apply to their soil resources concerning formation,
degradation, manipulation and management of the resource and can be a valuable addition
to soil management tools accessible to managers . They refer to this body of knowledge as
the grammar or detailed theories of the taxonomy which in turn is the expression or
sentence the knowledge is applied with.
It has been accepted by researchers that some general principles can be appl ied to
traditional taxonomic systems. Firstly, there exists some complex indigenous knowledge
about the hierarchical organisation of the soil mantle. This includes the recognition and
implementation of morphological attributes for soil c lassification which are at the same
time dynamic, utilitarian and symbolic. There may also be differences in wisdom among
people according to age, gender, social status and experience (Barrera-Bassols & Zinck,
2003) , l iteracy and wealth (Oudwater & Martin, 2003) with regard to ethnopedological .
knowledge.
Barrera-Bassols & Zinck (2002) concluded that In general, four sets of classification
criteria are used in ethnic classification of soils;
48
1 . colour and texture - in almost all documented classifications,
2. consistence and soil moisture
3 . organic matter, stoniness, topography, land-use and drainage, and
4. fertility, productivity , workabili ty, structure, depth and soil temperatures
They noted that there does not appear to be a clear distinction between soil and land
characteristics which are somewhat more generic in nature. Wil l iams (2006) looked at the
Aztec culture ' s soil classification system and identified similar criteria to other cultures in
that they focussed on colour, topography, organic matter, fertility and human amendments.
OIlier et al. ( 1 97 1 ) noted that soil knowledge and classification in their field work with the
New Guinea Highlanders was clearly influenced by the characteristics that contributed to
the usefulness of the soil in their cultural activities i . e. horticultural value or source of
pigments . S iderius & deBakker (2003) introduced the historical systems used in the
Netherlands to name land, plots or sites and soils . Primarily names were applied
holist ical ly on biophysical and soil quality factors and some names are still found in the
modem Dutch Soil Classification System as subgroups demonstrating a valuable
combination of local and scientific knowledge.
An example of using the senses to distinguish soil qualities can be found in the Nga Rauru
whakarauaki : Te oneone I hongia e Tu ri, l iterally, the soil that Turi smelled. The action by
Turi , eponymous ancestor for Nga Rauru, of determining the fertility of the soil by smelling
it and thus determining the location of their new settlement near Patea after the migration
from Hawaiiki is remembered forever in the proverb for an iwi that sti l l resides in the South
Taranaki locality today23 .
4.3 Land characteristics (including Maori nomenclature)
Further classifications relevant to the management of soils by Maori include the following
descriptions for land or whenua characteristics pertinent to horticulture (Table 4 .3) . There
is also a perceptual or SUbjective dimension to indigenous soil classifications (Ettema,
1 994) . This component of the classification is less easi ly defined but forms an important
set of criteria for the people involved e .g . , soil workability, suitabi lity to specific crops or
23 Personal Communication, Mrs Queenie Gripp, Nga Rauru. March 2004
4 9
Table 4 3 Maon nomenc ature for and forms and vegetatlOn24
PInaki; pmeki
Pmakitanga
, .. ,. ' i'{
,
.
Parehua; pjapapa;. wnakahua
A hi l l sloping gently
A gentle s lope
Terrace, p latform or ridge
Tiapu; onetaipu .. Ferti le lands - especial ly sandy alluvial soils
, ��':': '" .. .:
'
..
Reretu �'" .;;. of ! Loamy, al luvial land on the banks of rivers
':' ", ,," . ' : " ··f;. ;� : . <': '
.Patohe � �.;�. " " ';.,.1 .': �;; An abandoned cultivation s ite or fal low site
Tit6hea; hliiki; -tohetea; hahore
, " . , .
. " ". '
Pakeka
Pu.whenua, taekai
. '
Pahoahoa, ake�e . ,..,',.'
Triakau
Pangahu
Wbakapara; whakap�apara25
Waerenga
Pakihi �' . " J
Raorao (Nga� Tahu iwi dialect)
Manaha; manahanaha
Mlirea
W�ipapa '
Kirea < • , •• , ' . '.,'
Rake
"C! . • "
. . '
... . , .',
KUkiiwai; onekotai � . �
' . ' .'
Repo; hiihi [Hine-i-te-hiihi]; rei
Ngaere
Papatupu; pap�tipu
Pari; panpari, tiipari . "c . J
-.
Kiin�e; r��; matarae; ng�u
Harua; wharua , - .:�" ,",' ,, " : .. �
Toitil . "';.: "" , <' . ' >..:. '"
. :.,
.
" "
Land barren or exhausted through cult ivation
Land exhausted through cultivation
Exhausted lands (cfsteri le)
Sterile lands (cfexhausted)
Inferior lands, waste lands, bog
Hard clay lands - a c lass ofPahoahoa
Burning woody remains for i ncorporation as ash; adding compost
Clearing created through whakapara (from waere - to clear)
Open grass country - considered as barren land for cropping
Level or undulating country, easy for travel l ing
Open country, c lear of scrub, trees, etc,
C leared of weeds
Overgrown cultivations (or second growth of timber on a s ite)
Land exhausted by frequent cropping
Bare or barren ground; Whakarake - to make bare
Wet, swampy land/s ite
Swamp (Hine-i-te-huhi ; maiden of the swamps in Maori mythology)
Bog (powharu = quagmire)
Hard ground
Cliff or precipice (kapiti-kowatu - rocky cliff)
Promontory
Val ley
Sandy place/mud flat, covered at high tide.
Terrace of a hill (upanepane [adj.) terraced)
Uncultivated open country
In its natural state, undisturbed or tillcultivated
24 Best, 1 976; Roskruge, 1 999; Wi l l iams, [ 1 992]; Hond, 1 995; Coffin, 2007, and various other informants
25 Taranaki iwi and dialect
50
uses, sensi tivity to specific problelTI (e.g. eros ion or degradation), or historical basis for
land management dec is ions . The val ue of soi ls as a direct or indirect dietary source of
Inicronutrients necessary for human survival has also been identified and an example of this
as appl ied by Maori would be the consumption of uku (clay) in lean t imes (refer page 47).
In comparing the indigenous classifications (including Maori) to western classifications,
they appear to be based primarily on functional applications and surface horizons whereas
western classifications determine a taxonomy or hierarchy using pedogenesis as a basis and
three dimensional units i . e. horizons (Ettema, 1 994; Niemeijer, 1 995) .
Examples of Milon knowledge surrounding the diverse uti l i ty other than horticu lture that
soils provided are common place. Taranaki iwi were well practised in consigning taonga or
treasures to the care of Hine-i-te-huhi (their 'god' of the swamps) through the burial of
treasured items inc luding wooden carvings in spec ific swamps (sometimes c lassified as
wet lands) to cure and/or preserve them but also cOlnmonly to conceal them from invading
and marauding tribes (Phil lips et al. , 2002,' Allen et al. , 2002 ; Wi lmshurst et aI. , 2004)26.
This indicates they were aware of the chemical and physical composition of different
swamps to be able to uuiise tnelTI In this way. S imilarly, practitioners of weaving used
different types of mud, sometimes known as pant as dyes in their flaxwork. The sites
containing the muds were protected and managed by successive generations to ensure their
dyeing quality was retained27 .
4.4 Site selection
Site selection for Maori horticulturists was important for a successful crop season and the
selection process was adapted to the local ity under consideration . Jones ( 1 986 & 1 989)
looked at the importance of hil l soils (mostly col luvium) and alluvial soils in traditional
Maori gardening. Hi l l soi ls were believed to be favoured because they gave better frost
protection (especially on north facing slopes), were in abundance and were easier to cle·ar
by burning. This was certainly the observation by early visitors to the Marlborough Sounds
26 Also, personal communications, nga kaumatua 0 Ngati Rahiri me At�awa (Taranaki)
27 Personal Communication, Mrs Whero-o-te-rangi Bai ley (Taranaki) , December 2004
S I
(Law, 1 969). All uvial soi ls generally have better natural ferti l ity, better water holding
capacity, were easy to clear and could be gardened with lTIOre intensity. Barber ( 1 989)
quotes an 1 840 statement that : 'Miiori were very partial to cultivating the face of hills,
contending that the crops are better '. He doesn ' t clarify the slope or aspect of these hi l l
faces in his statement however. Papakura ( 1 938) noted that cultivations were generally not
positioned at the foot of hil ls due to the potential for water run-off to damage the gardens .
Jones ( 1 984) described an archaeological site on yellow-brown sandy soils in the Hokianga
Harbour which appeared to have been gardened to support an adjacent settlement. The
soils were located in a pocket between steep parabolic dunes, were modified with charcoal
addi tions, free draining and ideal ly suited to both kUmara production and storage.
Ngati Maru of inland North Taranaki sought elevated flat sites sheltered from the cold
south winds and preferably sloping to the north-east for the morning sun for their
cultivations28 . Tribes in the Queen Charlotte Sounds always chose sites on hill s ides facing
north to receive the most sunl ight (Law, 1 969; Potton, 1 986) . Gardens were often located
within a convenient distance from the seasonal settlement of the landowners and access to
tracks for ease of movement of produce29 . Other hapu and iwi throughout the country
selected sites suited to their particular location and cl imatic tolerance. Evidence from some
of the historical stone gardens at Otuataua (NZHPT, 2003), Cape Runaway and the
Wairarapa Coast (Jones, 1 989a; Molloy, 1 993) and Little Barrier Island and Kapiti Island
(Best, 1 976) indicate the stone rows may have been orientated and used as windrows,
windbreaks or boundaries . Artificial shelter is recognised as one of the management
techniques applied by Maori over horticultural sites (Mol loy, 1 993) .
Land covered in bracken fern which was to be used for intensive cropping was usually
cleared manually through weeding rather than burning to minimise re growth of the fern
(McFadgen & Sheppard, 1 984). General c learance however and the intentional stimulation
of fern growth was achieved through burning off bush and forest lands prior to their uti l ity'
(Best, 1 976; Beever, 1 98 1 ; Anderson, 1 998) . C learance of scrub, bush and forest creating
28 Personal communication, the late J W Nuku, Kaumatua 0 Ngati Maru, December 2004.
29 Personal Communication, Mrs Te Ra Wright, Kuia 0 Ngati Apakura hapu 0 Maniapoto iwi, Tanehopuwai
Marae, 1 9 December 2004.
52
new land for cultivation usual ly occurred in late autumn fol lowed by a fallow period during
winter and then the land was dug over in preparation for planting (Firth, 1 972) . This
almost equates to the ' stale seedbed' approach used in contemporary horticulture . Hil lside
clearing was generally approached through swiddening or the ' s lash and bum' technique
(Leach, 2005) . Shortland ( 1 856) observed that in the Waikato they generally cleared land
around the month of July and left the debris to dry. It was burned the following January or
February and left unti l the next September when it was finally cleared and planted.
Experienced Maori horticulturali sts are also believed to have understood the value of
planting alongside any river whereby the constant air movement counters the cold air or
frosts for up to 1 50m on either side (Jones, 1 986) . Val ley floors were not generally used
for horticulture as they were very prone to frosts. The proximity of cultivations to
defensive pa was also important to ensure the safety of the community against raiding tribes
(Best, 1 995b) . The concept of defensive pa is relatively new in Maori society as prior to
the introduction of guns and frequent quarrel l ing, most tribal groups l ived in papakainga or
settlements that were associated with their activities such as fishing or cultivations and only
retreated to a defensive pa in times of threats .
4.5 Terracing
History has shown that terracing of sloped lands is one of the oldest forms of land
modification in an enduring effort by agriculturists to manage soil , water and geomorphic
processes and to conserve land resources (Sandor, 2006) . Ongley ( 1 93 1 ) noted the
existence of 'Maori terraces ' on the Porirua-Titahi Bay headland and considered them as
having been purposefully establ ished for kiimara production3o. His position was
corroborated by evidence of earl ier ethnographers and by the recent nature of the terraces,
their regularity, distribution, situation on north facing slopes and the occurrence of
unweathered greywacke pebbles which had obviously been added to the soil to assist
drainage and heat retention (Ongley, 1 93 1 ; Walton, 1 983 ; Jones, 1 989 ; NZHPT, 2003 ;
Mitchel l & Mitchell , 2004) . These specific terraces have succumbed to residential
30 These terraces are known as Koanga-umu and are believed to derive from the Ngati Ira occupation of the
area after 1 500AD. Currently some remnants are within Stuart Park, Titahi Bay (Fordyce & MacLehn, 2000)
53
development but their existence contributes to the understanding of pre-European
horticulture . Other terraced sites attributed to pre-European Maori horticulture have been
recorded at Kawerau, Aotea Harbour, and Weiti in Northland (Furey, 2006) .
Terracing can achieve a number of responses in agricultural systems. Their function in
major amendments includes : creation of a stable topographic base for crops, soil retention
and erosion control , water runoff management and rnicroclimate modification (Sandor,
2006). They are also often used to bring land otherwise unsuitable for sustained agriculture
or horticulture for reasons such as slope into economic use (Sandor & Eash, 1 995) .
4.6 Rotation
Land rotation was a common practise general ly applied as a rotation of not more than three
years crop production at any one site. Best ( 1 976) stated that for kUmara crops, cropping
was undertaken for no more than three years on any s ite which was then allowed to lie
fal low for the next 7- 1 4 years, allowing for the regeneration of scrub and natural fertility
levels through plant l i tter. S immons (quoted in McFadgen & Sheppard, 1 984) stated that in
general, cultivated crops were grown on any one site for only 2 years out of 6 . Taylor
( 1 958) noted that there is good evidence that fal low lands were valued for their store of
fernroot and that crop rotation was a standard approach to crop production by almost the
whole of Maori . It has been suggested that the fallow period extended for 25 years or
longer & secondary forest or scrub was al lowed to regenerate between crops (Leach, 2005) .
In contrast to the above rotation principles, Shortland noted in 1 85 6 that potato crops in the
North Island were grown by Maori communities for two years as a seed crop and then a
further five years as a maincrop often followed by a self perpetuating crop and the ground
was then left to fallow. He surmised this approach was based on the natural fertil ity of the
soi l . Furey (2006) suggests a cropping period of up to 6 years continuously depending on
key variables fol lowed by a fal low of 1 0-20 years based on archaeological investigations in
the Hauraki and Auckland regions . It is almost certain that the rotational practices varied
between tribe and location (as indicated above) and were a response to the environmental
factors which each tribe had to contend with.
5 4
4.7 Maori soils
New Zealand soils modi fied by pre-European Maori in such a way as to benefit horticulture
are recogni ed in the sc ience of soi l class ification and officially classed as 'Artefact fill
anthropic so i ls ' or 'plaggen soi l s ' (Gumbley et of. 2004) ; or simply as 'Maori soi ls ' or
'made soi ls ' by Inany lay people.
Challis ( 1 976) states that 'Maori-made soils are distinguishable from their surroundings by
different, usually darker, colouration and the apparent addition of gravel and sand or in
some cases shell ' . Soils modified by pre-European Maori communities have been studied
throughout the country and reveal extensive areas used for agricultural pursuits in both
dryland and wetland systems (Barber, 1 984) . Chittenden et al. ( 1 966) classified 1 000 acres
(445ha) on the Waimea Plains near Nelson as 'Maori Gravel ly Sandy Loam' . These soils
are described as :
' . . . found in scattered areas of the Waimea Plain and at Riwaka and Motueka,
marking the sites of k£imara beds made by Maoris prior to European settlement.
The reputed practice of the Maoris was to transfer and spread fine gravel and sand
over the land to provide suitable cultural conditions for the kiimara plant. Scrub
was taken to these sites and burnt on slow fires to give ash and charcoal, which
increased soil fertility and gave them their characteristic dark-coloured topsails.
The European soon recognised the value of these old kiimara beds, [,, ! f 1 1" ,., /n"+il;� ,
built up by the Maoris is gradually disappearing under modern farm use.
Consequently the soils are not as well defined as in the past and will in time, apart
from their physical properties, resemble the adjacent Waimea and Riwaka soils.
Profiles of this soil vary with the locality. The topsoil to a depth of 10-12in (25-
30cm) is usually a very dark grey or black gravely sandy loam overlying the
original soil, which on the Waimea Plain, is typically a greyish brown silt loam . . .
The fertility is high. The soil is only slightly acid, phosphorus and potassium are
high, and the calcium in medium supply. The increased fertility from the addition of
the wood ash is less apparent than 30 years ago and likewise the darker colour is
less conspicuous. This soil is used for market gardening and farm crops on the
Waimea Plain andfor tobacco and orchards at Riwaka and Motueka. '
(Chittenden et al. , 1 966 : 1 6- 1 7)
The addition of gravels and sand to the A Horizon3 l has been scientifically proven as a
deliberate action by cultivators (Rigg & Bruce, 1 923 ; Wellman, 1 962 ; Challis, 1 976) and is
considered to have extended the growing period for crops by one or two weeks in marginal
31 A Horizon: a horizon in the soil profile forming at, or adjacent to, the topsoi l that shows an accumulation of
decomposed organic matter (McLaren & Cameron, 1 994 :7)
55
climatic zones (Chall is , 1 976) or simply efforts to improve crop production on soils already
with potential (Walton, 1 984) . The practise appears so widespread that Maori had a special
name for the baskets used for taking gravel to the kUmara beds; these were known as
pukirikiri . Yen ( 1 974) considered the addition of gravels to kUmara grounds was a
response to the clay content of New Zealand soils and the shal low topsoils over clay
subsoils . A further function he considered was the insulating or heat retention effect of the
gravels for the plants.
The pre-European stone gardens around the Auckland Isthmus (to be discussed in Chapter
5) all incorporate sand or gravel to the soil profile, ostensibly to warm the soil and
sometimes include additions of shell, charcoal and ash to improve fertility of the soil (Yen,
1 96 1 ; Wellman, 1 962; Law, 1 975) . The term ahuwhenua refers to the action of working the
soil. Traditional practices, especially for kUmara production, included adding sand,
pebbles, shell and gravel to heavy soils to create a friable consistence, improved porosity
(Shortland, 1 856) and/or to add warmth through the taking in of heat by the stones - heat
retention (Jones, 1 986; HZHPT, 2003 ; Gumbley et al. , 2004) . Laying stones under the
kUmara plant laterals or runners was another practice used to nurse the plant into
production. These soils were often referred to as Onehanahana. Wood ash was often
collected after burning scrub and added as a fertiliser (Hargreaves, 1 963) and in some areas
such as Taranaki , mixed compost from ash, leaf & branch matter was specifically made and
mixed in. Burning any woody remains previously fel led and left to dry on the proposed
cultivation site and using the ash as a ferti l iser; a technique known as whakaparapara and
the clearings were known as waerenga.
Nga Rauru of South Taranaki have identified large tracts of coastal land within their rohe or
district which, prior to colonisation, had been specifically amended with beach sand to
benefit cultivation. Accompanying these areas are many so called ' borrow pits' believed to
be the sites where the sand was quarried or extracted and carried to the cultivation sites32 :
Stones and sand were also sourced from river beds and coastline areas . Jacomb ( 1 994)
32 Unpubl ished notes on traditional resources by Nga Rauru and presented at Nga Rauru Muru me te Raupatu
hearing, Ihupuku Marae, Waitotara. 1 4 October 1 99 1 .
56
describes 'borrow pits ' on the shores ofWaihora (Lake Ellesmere/Wairewa) at the southern
lilnit of kiimara cultivation . Walton ( 1 984) identified similar borrow pits on the
Matarikoriko b lock in North Taranaki and their contribution to what he called 'made' soils .
Further, he identifies these soils as very s imilar to other soils in Waikato and argues they
were not amended to bring particular soils into kiimara production but to improve
production overall . An extensive area of soil altered by Maori cultivation through the
addition of sand and charcoal materials is at Ration Point, Pauatahanui inlet north of
Wellington, (Healy, 1 980).
So-called 'black' soils still encountered on some Maori soils provide evidence of even
more intensive amendments to assist crops (Taylor, 1 958) . Ash from the burning of
existing vegetation or slow-burning of tight bundles of dried fern and brushwood (manuka
etc.) brought to the sites, contributed to their immediate fertility and the creation of a
charcoal laden topsoil33 . Taylor ( 1 958) identifies these soils at sites north of Whangarei,
the eastern Bay of Plenty, Waikato and Waipa river flats and the Nelson region and noted
that earlier analyses showed ' elevated available phosphate [Phosphorus] and potash
[potassium] levels and higher total nitrogen levels, indicating a better organic regime in
the soil' . Rigg & Bruce ( 1 923) considered the b lackening of the soil was also a material
advantage as the whole profile would absorb heat better and result in an earli er crop .
These black soils show similarities to the Amazonian Dark Earths or Terra Preta de India
. found in the Brazilian Amazon region. These Amazonian Dark Earths are believed to be
human artefacts or the product of indigenous soil management created by pre-Columbian
Indians from 500 to 2500 years BC to support large human settlements and abandoned after
the invasion of the Spanish (Mann, 2002; Baskin, 2006)34 . The blackening of these soils is
believed to have been achieved through the charring of biomass resulting in nutrient-rich
charcoal which was then incorporated into the pre-existing yellow soils . The black soils are
33 See also transcript of radio interview with biologist Alfred Hams on Radio Live (NZ) 5 May 2007 -
available at www.pubicaddress.netiprint.4 1 53 .sm
34 See also the transcript for The secret of El Dorado, screened on BBC Two television on 19 December 2002.
Transcript is avai lab le at www .bbc .co.uklscienceandnature
57
characterised by high carbon and phosphorus content and, high cation exchange, pH & base
saturation levels giving them high ferti lity status (Lehmann et al. , 2003) .
4 .8 Drainage
Maori were known to actively drain swampy and flood-prone areas to assist In their
horticultural operations, especially in the production of kiimara which preferred free
draining soils . Wilson ( 1 922) described remnant surface drains from 6- 1 2 feet (2-4m) in
depth and up to 25 feet (8m) wide around the Kaitaia and Papatoetoe districts. These drains
were presumed to achieve two outcomes for local inhabitants; drained soil for cropping and
flood spillways for occasional flooding which may have occurred from rivers, streams and
lakes near the cultivated sites. S imilar drains were described in the Marlborough region by
Skinner ( 1 9 1 2) who also considered them big enough for a small canoe to navigate. Minor
drainage was achieved with the addition of stones, gravel or shell materials to many soils .
Conjecture also exists that drains and ditch systems may have purposefully been dug to
assist in the agronomy aligned to taro crops . Better drained soils contribute to protecting
the crops from Phythium spp. diseases, to which taro are prone. They may also contribute
to improved ground-storage of crops, including taro and kiimara (Barber, 1 984) . In his
review of the role of wetland horticulture, Barber identified four primary, agronomic
reasons for such extensive drainage systems in pre-European times : solely as drainage of
excessively wet soils or soils prone to wetness, water diversion, ostensibly for irrigation,
the reclaiming of land for alternative land uses, and modification of soils to assist specific
crops . Taro and flax plantat ions would benefit from managed water content in their soils
whi le kiimara crops would require fully drained soils for best outcomes.
Barber ( 1 989) later states that ditch systems or drains associated with traditional Maori
horticulture have been identified in many archaeological investigations and had four
practical functions : steep and gentle slope ditch systems respectively for drainage, land
boundaries and wetland ditches for the purposes of drainage, water reticulation and
probably some irrigation practices.
5 8
4.9 Soil ferti l ity
The incorporation of ash from the burning of groundcover and bush prior to planting is
accepted as a frequent amendluent to soils (Best, 1 976; McAllum, 2005) which contributed
to the soil ferti lity levels. The ash and charcoal additions are recognised as contributing to
increased levels of phosphorus, potassium and calcium. Some conj ecture has been noted
however as to how Maori supplied enough nitrogen in their amended, gravely soils to
benefit crop production. Taylor ( 1 958) concluded that the problem may not have been too
difficult.
'First, the slow fire method of fertilisation would produce much charred material
and soot - absorbent material from which the nitrogen is not completely lost as it is
in ashes. Secondly, soil nitrogen would build up during a fallow under native
vegetation. Thirdly, successive slow fires producing additional charred material
would partially sterilise the topmost layer of the soil causing a flush of available
nitrogen. This combination of practices could well provide the answer. ' (P78)
Compost production and incorporation into cultivations was not considered to be a
common practice in tradi tional Maori horticulture. An example of tradi tional practice in
compost-making can be found in samples taken at the turn of the twentieth century from a
compost heap in coastal Taranaki used for kilmara beds (Bishop, 1 903) . The compost was
found to be in two fractions : coarse and fine sands which made up around 800/0 of the mix
and a mixture of twigs, leaves, si lt and charcoal and i t provided a surprising amount of
phosphate to the soil bel ieved to have originated frOlu the charcoal material (ibid.) .
Remnant stone gardens in the Auckland district also corroborate this practice.
An interesting example of traditional compost was related in notes by the editor of the
Journal of the Polynesian Society in 1 923 . He wrote:
'It is interesting to note . . . the practice of the Taranaki Miioris in the preparation of
a compost for use in the cultivation of kiimara. It was the custom of these people in
by-gone times, after a flood in the rivers, or a storm at sea for the experts in
agriculture . . . to examine most carefitlly the deposit of sand and silt thrown up or
left by storm or flood. If, in the opinion of the tohunga these deposits were suitable
for the purpose, and the omens propitious, the people were at once assembled, and
what we may term a 'kete brigade ' was formed and the sand and silt gathered in
ketes or baskets and passed from hand to hand to a spot selected where it was
mixed with vegetable matter, gathered in by other bands of workers. This consisted
mainly of the succulent ground-fern called Mouku (Asplenium bulbiferum), which
grew in abundance throughout the neighbouring forests, and the leaves and tender
5 9
branches of certain shnlbs of the coprosma family - the taupata, karamu, raurakau
- and probably leaves of other trees and shnlbs in a lesser degree.
This deposit when thoroughly mixed was carefitlly covered and after due
religious ceremonies, was set apart and left to mature in readiness for the planting
season, when it was opened up and apportioned out by tohunga to the various
family plots prepared for the growing of kiimara.
The term applied to this mixture was whakaparapara, a free translation of
the meaning which is, to add or blend ingredients (into a compost) for the purpose
of producing vigorous growth. ' (Anon, 1 923 :93)
A key point to note about pre-European Maori is that they did not have access to l ivestock
or their by-products (dung, urine etc .) which were often mainstays in the continued
fertili sation of land accessible for crop production by most other indigenous peoples.
Maori tradition frowns upon the waste products of any organism, humans included, being
used directly as manure on food production sites. Waste materials were returned to non
productive land areas to break down naturally and then re-incorporate into the soil profile.
This was cons idered as the return of the products to Papatucmuku (the Earth Mother) who
would in turn purify them before they were al lowed to contribute to any system accessible
by her descendants (mankind), especially food production systems.
The modem farming systems in New Zealand are now based upon an inclusion of animal
husbandry as part of a land-use rotation and stem from the origins of agriculture itself
(Taylor, 1 958) . Maori did not have this aspect in their land management systems and thus
relied upon their own interpretation of soil ferti lity factors and the needs of various crops
they produced.
4.10 Irrigation
In general Maori did not irrigate their crops, preferring to leave the functional needs of the
plants to the natural elements35 . Tregear ( 1 904: 1 05) wrote :
'It is, however, a most extraordinary thing for so observant and industrious a people
not to have filrnished clean water to their plants. They never watered their gardens
even in times of drought and when water was close by, and crops sometimes perished
for want of this simple aid in the struggle/or existence. '
35 Personal Communications, T Farquhar; V Adlam (both Ngati Rahiri) and other informants
60
The need for irrigation will have varied considerably due to the site and soil characterist ics
where cropping was being undertaken. Site selection based on crop determinants such as
drainage characteristics or inversely, water holding capability, appears to have been a key
factor in achieving successful crop outcomes .
4.1 1 Chapter summary
There is no doubt that Maori knowledge relevant to the soil mantle is on a par with other
indigenous cultures already investigated in this discipline. Maori can therefore contribute to
ethnopedology knowledge systems within the soi l science or pedology discipl ine. Until
now, Maori knowledge from an ethnopedological perspective has not been considered from
an academic standpoint. From a purely linguistic point of view, the variety of names
applied to soil types and land classes by Maori is highly descriptive and suitably diverse.
The classification criteria follow those of other cultures in that they are applied to a range
of characteristics, usually morphological or biological, and focus on the topsoil horizon of
the resource. While many of the Maori terms applied to the soils are no longer in regular
use, ostensibly as a result of the influences of colonisation, many are still used by
remaining native speakers of the Maori language in their daily conversation or retained in
whakatauaki or traditional proverbs .
Maori also have a body of knowledge or matauranga associated with land-use activities,
primarily around horticulture but also other uses. The expertise applied to management of
the land resource around cropping or utility was determined through generations of
experience and has been proven to be highly effective. Actions such as site selection for
crops, amendment of soils to benefit [kiimara] crops, nutritional amendments of soils,
amendment of sites (e .g . terracing) and crop rotation were all based on long-standing and
sound knowledge about the soil resource and crop or plant needs and are still appropriate in
modem horticultural systems.
6 1
Chapter 5 : Mara Kai
5.1 Introduction
This chapter looks at the type of horticultural activities undertaken in traditional Maori
society and how those activities contributed to their traditional economy and subsistence
needs. There is a wide diversity of crops which were managed under various levels of
intensity; some, such as aruhe or fernroot, in their natural environment and others in a
wholly cultivated environment. The horticultural skill appl ied by the community to achieve
these production systems with a l imited array of tools is remarkab1e in itsel f and contributes
to a cultural foundation for contemporary Maori horticulture .
5.2 Traditional horticulture
Anthropologists refer to the development of agriculture (and horticulture) as the Neolithic
Revolution (Leonard, 1 974) and acknowledge that i t contributed to the acceleration of man
as the dominant l ife-form on Earth and the development of large and complex societies.
The early cultures of civilisation held horticulture in very high esteem. The Greeks
described agriculture (read: horticulture) as ' the nursing mother of the arts, for where
agriculture succeeds prosperously, the arts thrive ' (Xenophon 444-359 BC) . It was
understood that the origins of cities - and hence civil isation - arose from agriculture as he
[the agriculturist] became bound to his cultivations which gave him his returns and
consequently became his fixed abode. Early civil isations such as those in Egypt and China
grew on ' recent soi ls ' derived from alluvium; they were friab le, deep and ferti le soils
rejuvenated with each flood that brought fresh materials (Taylor, 1 958) . Much of the
knowledge drawn together by archaeologists is sourced from the excavated remains of
plants and animals and their association to early civilisations and agricultural practices
(Heiser, 1 973) .
Maori are horticulturists . We know this through whakapapa which identifies the fact right '
at their very origins; the sons of Papatiianuku and Ranginui included Rongo-marae-roa and
Haumia-tiketike, manifestations and guardians of the cultivated and uncultivated crops
respectively. History recalls the importance of key crops during the periods of migration to
62
Aotearoa; taro, aute, uwhi or yallls, hue, kUmara and ti i kouka (cabbage tree) . Maori were
also quick to i dent i fy usefu l attributes of lTIany endemic New Zealand plants and the
contribution they could n1ake to their society, and thus plants such as harakeke were added
to their sui te of hort i cultural ly Inanaged plants . Prior to the arrival of Europeans, Maori
were subsistence horticul turi sts ' dependant on the success of these crops for matters of
survival, hosp ital ity and health. Leach & Stowe (2005) identify pre-European Maori as
horticul turists and arbori culturi sts (including agroforesh-y) rather than agriculturists. This
recognises the domestication and cultivation of food and uti l i ty crops in both annual and
perennial systems .
Subsequent to the colonisation of Aotearoa, Maori became key players in the cultivation,
production and marketing of horticultural crops - primari ly vegetables but not exclusively
to the new settlements . In the nud-nineteenth century Maori were the key suppliers of fresh
produce to burgeoning settlements such as Auckland and Nelson.
Buck ( 1 954), supported by his peers at the Bishop Museum in Hawaii, speculated that there
are two Inethods by which many food and uti li ty plants became introduced into Polynesia;
the gradual advance eastward from the Melanesian region anCl successhll establishment
where conditions were agreeable and, the deliberate introduction by man as he discovered
and settled each island or atoll, usually for uti l itarian reasons. They deduce that all food
plants, especial ly root crops such as yams, kUmara and taro were introduced to Polynesia
and ultimately Aotearoa/New Zealand by man on his many voyages. Duff ( 1 956) noted
that the introduction of kUmara in part icular during the migration of Maori created a distinct
advantage over the earlier inhabitants (tangata whenua) who were reliant on bush and
uncultivated foods and contributed to a population burst, especially in the North Island
where the climate favoured such crops.
If you consider these crops, think of the kiimara. In a tropical clilnate i t flowers and seed" i s
produced for the following season. I t allows for two parents to create the seed and the
reSUlting plants and occasionally a cross would occur which produced a new variety. In
Aotearoa, the cl imate is such that kiimara don' t flower and the only way to continue
63
cul tivation j s to store or overwinter klimara and then to encourage shoots or vegetative
growth in the spring to take on the role as new plants. This is a key adaptation and yet
Maori were quick to learn the processes required to continue production of kUmara in the
cooler and seasonal c1 i lnate of Aotearoa (Law, 1 970; Yen, 1 974) . Taylor ( 1 958 : 72) stated:
, . . . there can be few people, who with tropical plants, have successfully established
a system of agriculture in a temperate land' .
Horticulture [ agriculture] was once a part of daily l ife for the whole Maori community or
population and necessary for the survival of the people . It supplemented the activities of
fishing, forest and uncultivated food gathering, and the hunting of birds for food sustenance
in pre-European times. The extent of any reliance by Maori communities on gardened
produce for their daily and year-to-year sustenance is the subject of many debates,
primarily based on evidence of archaeological scholars of non-Maori descent. There is a
Inyriad of evidence however of, among other things, pii being occupied on a seasonal basis,
generally aligned to the activities associated with kUmara or crop production (especially in
northern districts) (McFadgen & Sheppard, 1 984) and other seasonal activities such as
fishing or bird snaring. Forbes ( 1 996) noted that Muaupoko cultivations around Lake
Horowhenua were somewhat small in size due to the abundance of natural food sources in
surrounding forest, bush and lake resources . Moon ( 1 993) and Firth ( 1 972) both conclude
that the rise of horticulture in traditional Maori society led to the development of special ist
skills and more permanent settlements .
The late Atiawa kaumatua, Moki White, in his submission to the Waitangi Tribunal for the
Taranaki claim on 1 1 Apri l 1 99 1 spoke of the relationship between the tribe and hapu and
the whenua as a sustaining resource. In reference to the strategic Atiawa pa Manukorihi, he
commented that:
'Obviously, any area supporting large numbers of fighting men, not to mention
those women, children and old people dependant on them, would have extensive
areas of cultivation set aside. A t the base of the cliff below Owae itself was a
sheltered alluvial terrace which was planted in garden right down to the canoe
harbour. Gardens stretched from Kainganui to Hikawera and Hikamutu, and
Pariroa was another area with large tracts of cultivation, as was Otuhitekai, lying
among the sandhills down by the beach.
In addition to these major planting sites, smaller gardens were dotted
throughout the area, as Waitara was famed for its rich fertile soils and good
64
growing conditions. In actual fact, the district was cultivated so extensively that in
later times all the big timber was gone and materials for canoes had to be brought
in from beyond Tikorangi.
Flax was another item extensively cultivated, with many acres tended by our
people . . . '
This statement echoes others by the older generation of Maori who identify the extensi ve
nature of traditional horticulture activities and the relationship between the people and the
activities of plant husbandry and food production . This is also compounded through the
naming of the gardens, names which are recalled in perpetuity, especially in whakapapa36 .
The ordinary or daily Maori diet in pre-European times is considered to have been based on
a mix of femroot, some kUmara and fish. Shawcross ( 1 967) aptly noted that cult ivated
crops were 'strictly occasional foods ' for Maori in the late 1 8th Century as they were not
avai lab le year round, even with good storage. They were often regarded as delicacies or as
a piquant to meals and added to the diet during feasts or hospitable occasions .
Today however, the practice of traditional horticulture by Maori is governed by both
political issues of the last 1 60 years, especially relating to land confiscations and sales or
whether Maori have retained any land to manage, and the demands of the Inarkets - both
export and domestic. There is considerable Maori involvement in the horticulture industry,
not necessarily as traditional producers but defmitely as contributors to the New Zealand
economy.
5.3 Pre-European phase (pre 1769)
Ngahuru : kura kai, kura tangata.
Harvest time [autumn}, wealth offoods, consequently afmankind
1 769 is accepted by Europeans as their first major interactive contact with Maori (not
including Abel Tasman) however, Maori believe they had visits prior to this date from
traders and explorers which accounts for some possessions they had prior to Cook in 1 769
(Richards, 1 993 ; Wiseman, 1 998) . Agriculture and horticulture were essential ly the same
36 Various informants including B Manaia (Ngati Ruanui); K Stirling (Ngati Porou); M Timutimu, M Tapuke
& A Taiaki (Atiawa)
65
thing - subsistence farming of crops and no herbivores . Activity surrounding product ion
was extremely structured with a strong deity relationship and reliance for some crops (e .g .
kUmara [Best, 1 976]) . Tools were almost exclusively wooden with a wide range of
special ist implements for various aspects of production. Bartering was common, especial ly
among tribes who l ived among various resources e.g. inland and coastal tribes bartering
forest foods for seafoods. The primary cultivated foods were kumara (Ipomoea batatas),
hue or (bottle) gourd (Lagenaria siceraria) , taro (Colocasia antiquorum), uwhi or yalTIS
(Dioscorea spp.) and aruhe or fernroot (Pteridium esculentum) . Barber ( 1 984) refers to
these crops as a ' l imited cUltigen inventory ' especially due to the l imiting climatic factors .
Furey (2006) identifies only six ' imported cultigens ' as being grown by Maori at the time
of the European arrival ; kUmara, taro, yam, gourd, tii-pore (Cordyline fruticosa) and aute
(Broussonetia papyri/era) . These writers and almost al l others reviewed for this thesis fall
into the trap of considering only p lants purposefully cultivated in gardens as the
composit ion of traditional horticulture for Maori where in fact there i s a much wider
inventory which will be discussed in Chapter six. The fact that Maori acknowledge both
Rongo-maraeroa and Haumia-tiketike as their gods of cultivated and uncultivated foods
respectively confirms the broader interpretation they have for horticulture within traditional
society.
All these afore-mentioned foods except the fern-root which is in fact the rhizome of the
bracken fern are considered to have been brought to this country during the migratory phase
ofMaori over 700 years ago. Yen ( 1 990) states :
'The achievements of Miiori agriculture were both adaptive and innovative. Of all the
Polynesian colonisations, New Zealand presented the greatest ecological contrasts to
the tropical island conditions under which Pacific agricultural systems were developed. '
Many writers have commented on the skil l required for Maori horticulturists to adapt to the
temperate c limate of New Zealand (Buck, 1 954; Yen, 1 96 1 ; Yen, 1 990; Leach, 1 989;
Roskruge, 1 999) . Other introduced crops that did not succeed in this new environment
included: coconuts, sweet & plantain bananas (Musa eumusa spp. , Musa australlmusa) ,
breadfrui t (Artocarpis altilis) and sugar cane (Saccharum of icinarum). Maori tradit ion
records the breadfruit in old waiata for i ts variety of uses prior to the migration to Aotearoa
66
under the name of kuru, but i t i s not known to have ever flourished in Aotearoa itself
(Cowan, 1 9 1 0) . Leach ( 1 989) suggests the salt spray on the long Pacific voyages would
have contributed to the fate of the breadfrui t and banana and, the rich humus of New
Zealand soi ls to the fate of the coconut. Yen ( 1 96 1 ) & Buck ( 1 949) both suggest the
c l imate would have been the key factor in the demise of these tropical crops.
5. 3 . 1 Stone gardens
Within the Auckland region there are remnants of over 8000 hectares of stone gardens
wh ich were a complex of horticulture production units and settlements prior to European
settlement (Sull ivan; 1 972; NZHPT, 2003) . The remnant gardens are known as the
Otuataua Stonefields and are now a reserve under the management of the Department of
Conservation and the Auckland Regional Council . Archaeologists have found that these
gardens provide good evidence of gardening practices prior to European intervention. For
example; incorporating sand or gravel to the soil profile to warm the soil (Yen, 1 96 1 ;
Wel lman, 1 962 ; Mitchell & Mitchell , 2004; Furey, 2006) and allow for earlier planting and
harvesting and, additions of shell , charcoal and ash to improve fertil i ty of the soil (ibid).
Stone rows bel i eved to have been used as windrows, windbreaks or boundaries are a
Qi stlnguishing feature of these gardens and are similar to those found at other s ites around
New Zealand including Cape Runaway and the Wairarapa Coast (Jones, 1 989a), Blenheim
(Matthews, 1 988) and Litt le Barrier Island and Kapiti Island (Best, 1 976) Taiamai Plains
[Bay of Islands] , Waipoua, Three Kings and Great Barrier Islands, North Canterbury &
Banks Peninsula (Furey, 2006). Yen ( 1 96 1 ) commented that the stone walls have been
related to kUmara production partly in the form of l imited shelter, but they created a further
limitat ion to the shifting or relocation of production grounds .
5. 3. 2 Wetland cultivation
Several archaeologists have worked on remnants of ditch and drain systems, primarily in
northern New Zealand (Kaitaia and environs, Bay of Is lands, also South Auckland) and
attempted to explain their role in traditional horticultural systems. The evidence of wet land
gardening is becoming increasingly obscure due to modem land uses destroying the
physical traces and also the loss of recorded history to corroborate the evidence. Barber
67
( 1 984) reviewed the role of wetland horticulture based on study of sites in Te Tai Tokerau
(Northland). He identi fied that primarily there were four reasons for such extensive
drainage systems in pre-European times;
1 . solely as drainage of excessively wet soi ls or soils prone to wetness
2 . water diversion, ostensibly for irrigation
3 . the reclaiming o f land for alternative (non-agricultural) land uses
4. modification of soils to assist specific crops, namely;
a . taro - which would benefit from consistent wetness
b. kumara - which would benefit from the drainage and added warmth
c. flax - which l ike taro would benefit from increased wetness
Other aspects of the pre-European horticulture system employed by Maori include the use
of a ' slash and bum' technique of clearing ground for planting (McGlone, 1 988 ; Jones,
1 989); terrace gardening on slopes and foothi ll areas (Ongley, 1 93 1 ; Jones , 1 989; NZHPT,
2003 ; Mitchel l & Mitchell, 2004) ; abstract fencing around gardens (Best 1 976; Jones,
1 989) and several labour intensive practices such as mounding of production p lots for
kiimara and yams, and weeding.
5.4 Contemporary Maori horticulture
Horticulture was a key element of pre-European Maori society. The place and role of
Maori agriculture and horticulture in New Zealand society since colonisation has varied
considerably throughout the decades. It is pertinent to focus on the phases of agricultural
development which have contributed to the position of Maori in the industry today. The
term agriculture is used in the context of econOlnic land uses and i ncludes horticulture .
Hargreaves ( 1 963 : 1 0 1 ) stated that :
( . . . while it is known that Abel Tasman in his 1 642 landfall on the New Zealand
coast had had on board his vessels pigs, and possibly other European animals, no
record exists of any attempt to land them, nor to provide the Miioris with seeds of
any European food or tree crops. '
In relation to Cooks second voyage of 1 773 , Begg & Begg ( 1 969: 1 1 7) wrote:
(George Forster described Cook 's efforts to introduce potatoes. (Captain Cook who
was determined to omit nothing which might tend to the preservation of European
68
L
garden plants in this country, prepared the soil, sowed seed') and transplanted the
young plants . . . , he chiefly endeavoured to raise such vegetables as have usejit! and
nutritive roots, among them particularly potatoe . . . corn of several sorts, beans,
kidney beans and pease [ sic] . ,
The arrival of Cook and other subsequent early explorers saw the introduction of many new
crops - all of which provided challenges for the Maori horticul turist . Grains - e .g . , wheat
and corn, fnlits, peaches, apples and citrus and new vegetables such as pumpkins, potatoes
(some taewa cultivars) and cabbage were all introduced during this time in the 1 8th century.
This introduced a new diet to Maori , especially the new sweet foods along with the meats
provided by grazing stock such as pigs and cows. Grains proved a chal lenge before
becoming a key economic crop for many iwi. Cook left the Marlborough Maori with wheat
seeds which the iwi grew successfully but, he did not tell them how to prepare the grain for
cooking and eating. In their ignorance the i wi tried to eat the hard grains and many broke
teeth in the process so they threw away this new food. Only on his return did Cook teach
them about grinding the grain and turning it into flour. A number of tribes created
successful businesses in the early colonial years based on wheat and grain . The
introduction of new tools, beasts of burden and an economic society based on wealth and
possessions played a tyl230� rr.+:� 1D th.e c.hanging practices of hort iculture of the time.
5.5 Phases of contemporary Maori horticulture
The following phases have been determined for ease of discussion:
1 . Post contact ( 1 769 - 1 840)
2 . Post Treaty ofWaitangi ( 1 840 - 1 860)
3 . Post Land Wars ( 1 86 1 - 1 940s)
4. Post World War 2 ( 1 940s - 1 980s)
5 . Contemporary Society ( 1 980s onwards)
5. 5. 1 Post Contact Phase (1 769 - 1840)
Ngahuru kai hangai, koanga kai anga ke.
At harvest time eating openly, at spring eating secretively
69
This was the period of fastest change for Maori and one where new crops, tools and the
European ideals of economics were i ntroduced and partially accepted by IvHiorj . From the
time of Cook ( 1 769) a number of European crops such as grains (wheat, oats etc .) , a range
of vegetables including potatoes, parsnips (tara) , pUlupkins (paukena) and some fruits
(water melons, peaches, apples) became commonplace (Table 5 . ] l ists early introductions).
By the end of this phase, the introduced crops were replacing the staple Maori crops .
Table 5 . 1 : Crops introduced by early explorers to AotearoalNew Zealand
Year . <' < Location/re�on
.'
Crops
1 769 Capt. James Mercury Bay Potatoes given to a local chief
COOk37,38,39,40, 4 1 (Coromandel)
1 769 de Surville39,41 Doubtless Bay, Wheat, peas, ears of rice
Northland
1 772 Marion du Fresne Bay of Islands Wheat, maize, potatoes, nuts
(Crozet)38 , 40
1 773 Cook (second Motuara & 4 other Potatoes (sourced from the Cape of
voyage )37,39,42,43,44 locations at Queen Good Hope), carrots, parsnips,
Charlotte Sound, cabbage, onion, leeks, parsley, radish,
Marlborough, also at mustard, broad beans, peas, turnips,
Dusky Sound wheat, pumpkins, corn
1 777 Cook (third Queen Charlotte Cabbage, onion, leeks, & mustard-
voyage )37, 38 Sound self sown, limes, lemons, oranges,
nuts
. . (Note: some dIscuSSlOn eXIsts as to earl Ier 'VIsItors ' to New Zealand who may also have introduced crops .
See Richards, R. 1 993 : Rongotute, Slivers and other visitors to New Zealand)
When trying to interpret the writ ings related to this early contact period, it i s important to
recognise that non-Maori writers will apply their own cultural (often Eurocentric)
understanding of the subject under review. We must therefore recognise this b ias i n our
own interpretation in later years . Jones ( 1 989) reviewed Cook' s perception of the
horticulture he saw in Maori communities in 1 769.
37 Harris, 2002
38 Morris, 1 900
39 Richards, 1 993 :27-30
40 Begg & Begg, 1 969
4 1 McNab, 1 9 14 :287, 399
42 Leach, 1 983
43 Best, 1 976
44 Shawcross, 1 967a: 1 3 8
70
I t is clear that Jones appl ies an anthropological thought process to the horticulture Cook
wrote about by the use of terms such as ' carrying capacity ' of the land area and 'production
effici ency ' ; all used in the context of determining the welfare of the group (Maori) i . e . their
physical effort in horticulture for a subsistence or social return. In a Maori cultural context
the horticulture would have been measured as a success or otherwise based on an entire ly
different (and perhaps sUbjective) set ofmles than that of Cook, Jones and others .
These new crops were responsible for major changes in Maori agriculture. Potatoes
replaced the aruhe (fern-root) as the staple carbohydrate and starch food in the Maori diet
and were arguably the most important introduction of the time (Hargreaves, 1 963) . The
advantage for potatoes lay in their c l imatic tolerance and the ease of cultivation and
storage, especially in areas where the c l imate was cooler and kiimara were difficult to grow,
as wel l as the increased volume or yield taken from the same areas of land used for other
crops. Anderson ( 1 998) observed that the introduction of the potato to the southern
districts (Otago and Southland) led to more permanent settlements . Grains provided further
sustenance through flour production. In a general sense the wider range of crops brought an
improved nutritional status to the Maori diet for much of the year.
Many of the introduced crops were obtained en-route by the visiting explorers . Cook and
most of the other early European explorers travel led via the Cape of Good Hope (Cape
Town, South Africa) , a prominent trading port establ ished by the Dutch during the 1 ih
Century45 . It is believed that early introductions of potatoes, wheat, maize and many of the
vegetables and fruits were all sourced from the Cape of Good Hope (Yen, 1 962), where in
turn they were sourced from trading operations which stretched worldwide from the Indian
Empire, South America and Asia. Later, sealers and whalers may have sourced stock from
the Americas (ibid) . These early contacts and visiting sailors often made it their habit to
release animals at remote locations including pigs, poultry and rabbits and to supplement
this by planting ' food depots ' or simple gardens of vegetables and some fruits as food
45 http://regentsprep. orgIRegentslgloballthemeslmovementlexp. cfm accessed 3 1 March 2006
7 1
stores for future castaways (Raynal, 1 880) . These gardens generally included self
propagating crops such as potatoes, cabbage and some grains.
Other introductions which impacted heavily on Maori horticulture were the introduction by
the first European explorers of iron implements - including axes and gardening tools and,
draught animals to assist the human labour component in gardens/agriculhrre (Jones, 1 989a;
Hargreaves, 1 963) . Many plants were introduced, either intentionally or not. Some p lants
were introduced for their utility and others for their sentiment and nostalgia value to the
emigrants . Many became fortuitous invaders or weeds in the landscape (Clark, 1 949) , the
cabbage being a good example which was noted as growing wild like an indigenous plant
(Hargreaves, 1 963) . Non-edible plants such as dock (Rumex sp. ) and Scotch thistle
(Cirsium vulgare) were introduced, both wittingly and unwittingly during this same time
and remain as weeds in the New Zealand landscape today (Hargreaves, 1 963 : Leach 2005) .
Yen ( 1 974) aptly noted that the projectional capabilities of exotic plants in the agricultural
economics of communities are one of the primary contributors to the modem study of
ethnobotany.
Along with the new crops, weeds, pests and diseases, the early European colonisers also
introduced pigs and other animals for farming . The pigs mostly became feral and as such
created one of the greatest threats to Maori gardens of the time. Aside from requiring
fences s trong enough to withstand the pigs, another control process was to take the pigs
well into the bush away from the gardens and leave them to range at will until after the
harvest when they were rounded up and brought back as required (Clark, 1 949) .
Along with European ideals came the creation of a market and the system of trading and
bartering. By the early 1 9th century Maori were successfully growing crops to supply
visiting traders - sometimes to the detriment of their own food supplies. An example is the
dependence by settlers at Petone, Wellington district for supplies of fish, pork and potatoes
from the local Maori where a 50 lb (22 .5kg) basket of potatoes could be sold for one shill ing
in 1 840 (Leys, 1 890). It was also to the detriment of their land resources and the increased
area under production required new land to be broken into crops and increased labour
72
I
l
requirements. The traditional methods of cultivation were sti l l very much in practice except
in the cho ice of tools . Europeans had introduced metal i lnplelnents e .g . spades and rakes,
and Maori were quick to real ise the benefits of such tools and how they al lowed them to
increase the area and amount of crops grown. However Europeans also introduced new
s icknesses and alcohol - both destructive to Maori society, and animal and plant pests
which were (and are still today) detrimental to the environment.
Prior to the Treaty of Waitangi in 1 840, Maori were producing crops as an item of trade.
Cameron ( 1 964) summarised this change in production as follows :
'The Maori people underwent an agricultural revolution. This was caused by the
introduction of the potato, which not only resulted in a return to ancient methods of crop
cultivation, but also, because of the demand of visiting ships for food and the consequent
value of potatoes as an item of trade, greatly encouraged agricultural expansion,
particularly in the Northern districts. '
The greatest influences during this phase came first from the visiting explorers, whalers and
sealers during the eighteenth century, followed by the missionaries who settled among the
Maori population early in the nineteenth century . The effect of the new cultures on the
Maori l ifestyle, economics and politics cannot be underestimated.
The burgeoning settlement of this country created a strong demand for vegetables to supply
the growing population in this country and Tasmania and New South Wales, Austral ia.
Maori rose to the occasion and turned to producing crops for market rather than for self
use. This created i ts own problems in that the move from a rotational production of crops
to meet subsistence needs to a market driven demand saw huge areas of land under
production, often for years in a row. Tribes in the Firth of Thames were recorded in 1 80 1
as growing extensive fields of potatoes for trade as were iwi near B luff in 1 8 1 3 where a
field considerably larger than 1 00 acres (40 .Sha) was noted as 'attended to with as much
diligence and care as ever seen . . . ' (McNab, 1 908) and presented ' one well cultivated bed
of potatoes ' . Shawcross ( l 967a) noted that in the Bay of Islands vicinity, notable crops of
wheat, peas, potatoes, turnips, cabbage, kilmara and corn were being grown in 1 8 1 5 . In the
late 1 830s the Chatham Islands were known as the 'potato gardens of the Pacific ' . All of
73
this shows the abi l ity of Maori to adapt to the ir changing environment and to be
entrepreneurs in horticulture.
5. 5.2 Post Treaty ofWaitangi Phase (1840 - 1860)
Kei muri i te awe kapara, he tangata ke, mana i te ao, he ma.
Behind the moko is a different man, one who claims the world, he is untattooed. 46
This was a phase of very dynamic history for Maori . Will iam Hobson anived in New
Zealand in January 1 840 and began drafting the Treaty of Wai tangi in Engl ish . The Maori
translation was entrusted to the missionary Henry Will iams and h is son and completed on
5th February 1 840. The northern Maori chiefs were invited to a hui (meeting) to debate the
new treaty and on the 6th of February they were invited to sign it; 4 1 to 43 chiefs signed at
Waitangi on this day. On the 1 6th of February 1 840 an English version of the treaty was
forwarded to the British governluent (the first of several) (Orange, 1 987) .
Over the next few months, representatives of the Crown (missionaries and officials)
travel led the country acquiring the signatures of chiefs of other tribes. Not all signed but
between 540 and 545 signatures were obtained by July 1 840. On 2 1 May 1 840 Hobson
proclaimed sovereignty over all of New Zealand. Hobson did not acknowledge the non
s ignatory tribes, and in effect all Maori were to come under the ulnbrel la of the treaty from
this date. The Treaty has three objectives- the protection of Maori interests ; the promotion
of settler interests; and, securement of strategic advancement for the Crown.
The period of the Treaty of Waitangi brought a major influx of settlers and traders . It also
brought an interest from both settlers and the British Crown in acquiring ' land' . Crop
production boomed for Maori and they were the primary providers of produce to settlers,
settlements and traders over much of the country - especially during the 1 840s and early
1 850s . The rel iance on new tools and management techniques grew stronger (e .g . flour .
mil ls , grain harvests) . Land was being c leared to cope with increasing demand for produce
by settlers . Many coastal tribes including the Ngati Mutunga of Wharekauri (Chatham
46 Translation taken from Mead & Grove, 200 1 .
7 4
l
I l ands) were producing commercial crops which were being sold both locally and overseas
to countries such as Australia.
"The j\1iioris are our largest purveyors of foodstuffs. So large, indeed, as nearly to
monopolise the market and to exclude Europeans from competition ." (Quote from
'The New Zealander' newspaper, 1 848, given on Telstra Clear Biz (TV 1 ), 1 -9-2003)
In 1 844 the iwi of Opotiki were observed by missionaries to be in possession of two small
vessels used for trade and the iwi of Whakatane also owned a vesse l . This scenario was
repeated in many parts of the country. Vegetables were the key crops of production by
Maori at this time. In 1 857 many iwi had thousands of acres in grain and potato crops to
meet the dell1ands of a growing society . Labour was in p lent iful supply among Maori and
the key issue was the reduced land area being avai lable for crops limiting good crop
managell1ent. Pastoral opportunities began to appear in the 1 850s and agriculture was
becoming the primary land use in many regions (Jones, 1 989a) . By 1 860, wheat was the
major arable crop, surpassing potatoes for the land area under production. Potatoes
featured as one of the crops in many cash crop rotations in the South Island (Clark, 1 949)
In some regions, Maori also produced commercial volumes of fnlits such as peaches and
apples . As late as 1 886 Maori were sti l l the primary suppliers of fruit in the Tauranga and
Wanganu i Inarkets however, more commonly, areas of old and neglected fruit orchards
111arked the sites of abandoned villages (Hargreaves, 1 960) . Other lesser known crops
trialled and abandoned by Maori in the 1 870-80s were tobacco, hops and mulberry trees.
Tobacco continued to be grown for personal use and was never considered as a commercial
crop by Maori , primari ly because of the variable quali ty of seed and produce (ibid. ) .
The innate European interest in 'acquiring' title to land was becoming a focus of this era and
eventual ly led to the so-cal led 'Maori wars' during the 1 860s. S inclair (quoted in Jones,
1 989a) summed the situation up : By the end of that decade [ 1 850s] a consciousness that the
land should not be sold grew in the Miiori community. The fighting caused Maori to be
distracted from their routine of cropping to defending their resources. Confiscation of prime
horticultural and agricultural land following the wars destroyed any Maori dominance in
crop production.
75
5. 5. 3 Post Land Wars Phase (1860 - 1 940s)
Kua maoa te taewa [Te Whiti 6 Rongomai, Parihaka]
The potato is cooked [meaning that when the potato is cooked (after the wars),
the life principle is lost and it is then incapable of reproduction]
This phase began with the general neglect of Maori crops due to the people being involved
in defending the same lands . This is also the period where pastoralism replaced cropping
and the introduction of herbivore farming which utilised larger tracts of land became
common. The introduction of a government-imposed land tenure system on Maori (Maori
Land Court) effectively changed the social structures for them. Maori were beginning to
disperse from the communal settlements, kainga or pa, and as a result their reliance on the
group structure to survive was changing. The government of 1 892 imposed a ruling to end
private sales of Maori land making the Crown once more the sole purchaser of Maori land.
Between 1 892 and 1 900 more than a quarter of the total Maori land holdings ( 1 . 1 2 mi llion
hectares) was sold to the Crown and a further 1 72 ,000 hectares exempted from the private
purchase laws .
Smaller groups and families began to provide for themselves independently. Pastoralism
provided for this, as did the new system of land tenure . For other Maori (especially in
Taranaki) the confiscation of their land and introduction of perpetual leases took away their
ability to continue providing from their traditional land bases. For New Zealand in general ,
the establishment of the frozen meat industry in 1 882 signalled a major change in land use
(Morrell, 1 954) . Prior to this advent landowners had diversified from meat and wool to
wheat production but profits were limited (ibid).
The Native (later Maori) Land Court was set up in 1 865 under the Native Lands Act 1 862
fol lowed by subsequent legislation such as the Native Reserves Act 1 88 1 , Native Lands
Administration Act 1 886 and the Maori Land Settlement Act 1 894. The court at this time
was charged with creating title to Maori land, as is the system in European countries, and
facilitating the sale of land to settlers to meet the constantly growing demand from this
section of the population. It has been stated that :
'British law faced a problem in dealing with Maori society as it simply had no
concept of tribally or communally owned land. Land was a commodity that could
76
be owned by individuals or by legally recognised organisations . . . ideally land
should be freely disposable. ' (Butterworth & Butterworth, 1 995 : 2)
Aside from the constant demand for land by Europeans in the nineteenth century, the
communal ownership of land was seen by non-Maori as an impediment to economic
cultivation of land. As early as 1 886 there seems to have been a demand for the
individualisation of title of Maori land by some of the Maori owners (Hargreaves, 1 960).
This brought its own problems and Hargreaves (pg 356) also noted that :
( . . . in 1870, the individual reserves at Kaiapoi was only fourteen acres in extent - a
size too small to be an economic proposition, even for the Maoris. '
The process of change to Maori society and agricultural practices continued, supported by
legislation, changing technology and economics. During the late Nineteenth Century other
issues relat ive to Maori impacted on New Zealand society in general. In Taranaki , the
settlement of Parihaka by Maori in 1 866 (and subsequently), many of them landless as a
result of the confiscations, played a key part in the politics of the day. Parihaka Pa briefly
attempted to return to 'Maori self-sufficiency' replacing meat with seafood, tuna (eels) and
foods of the forest and returning to traditional vegetables such as aruhe, mamaku, p itau
(fern sh.oots) .?,nd 0�m.�ra and taro in favour of potatoes. This approach was later
abandoned and European foods allowed on the marae (Scott, 1 975) . The sacking of
Parihaka by the government in 1 8 8 1 fol lowed by the ilnprisonment of many of their men
created a landmark in our history which stil l exists. During the 1 890s a group of
charismatic young Maori establ ished a polit ical party and their influence continued
throughout the 20th Century and on to today. These men; (Sir) Apirana Ngata, (S ir) Peter
(Te Rangihiroa) Buck, (Sir) Maui Po mare and (Sir) James Carroll are well known for their
parliamentary influence during the first quarter of the century, one which affected Maori
land ownership and management among other factors .
The new century brought about fast economic changes and overseas wars . The loss to
Maori through fighting wars overseas and the influenza epidemic was very h igh. In 1 903
the establishment of ' incorporations ' as a management system for multiple owned Maori
land came about through the Maori Lands Administration J\mendment Act . This is a key
factor for Maori agriculture as it al lowed for the amalgamation of land interests to a single
77
management option and the return ' in principle' to communal l iving on the land which i s
the traditional system for Maori . In the late 1 920s, Ngata led a reform of the corporate
tenure of Maori land thus creating a significant development of Maori land in pastoral and
dairy farming (Morrell, 1 955 ; Firth, 1 972; Kawharu, 1 977). The focus at th is t i lDe was in
agricultural utility of land rather than horticulture.
In 1 920 the Native Trust Office (later, The Maori Trustee) was established through the
Native Trustee Act. The trustee was vested with the management of all the native reserves
previously under the control of the Public Trustee. Monies and rents from these lands
would then be used for the developlDent of Maori land and of Maori farming in general .
The Maori Trustee was also involved in funding the Maori hostels set up around the
country to accommodate Maori visiting towns and unable to gain accommodation in hotels
or boarding houses .
5. 5. 4 Post World War 2 Phase (1940s - 1980s)
This period was post-war and post-Depression . There was a large loss of potential Maori
leaders through both world wars creating a deficit still felt today . The influence of Maori
politicians such as Sir Apirana Ngata and Te Rangihiroa Buck extended over most Maori
settlements . Ngata brought about some legislative changes which still affect Maori today -
the creation of 40 acre ( l 6.2ha) 'economic' blocks ( i .e . amalgamated family interests) so
families could stay on their land and effectively have an area considered economic
(sustainable ! ) . In some areas Ngata focused on rebuilding the Maori identity which was
becoming lost through a loss of population and land base. Many Maori who grew up during
the times of The Depression in the 1 930s and through to the 1 960s, recall the extensive
gardens planted around the homesteads and marae. These gardens were tended to by all the
whanau and contributed to the food resources harvested from the bush, streams and ocean.
The urbanisation of Maori and division of land interests has contributed to the demise of
these gardens and reliance on retailed produce47 .
47 Various informants i ncluding B Manaia (Ngati Ruanui); K Stirl ing, H Hautapu, T Karauria & R T
McClutchie (Ngati Porou); M Timutimu & A Taiaki (Atiawa); P Kruger (Tuhoe); Q & E Gripp & 0 Bul lock
(NgaRauru); A Lawrence (Ngati Kahungunu)
7 8
The Maori population started to shift towards urban areas in search of work and housing,
hence the continued breakdown of Maori society. Maori hostels in the main towns assumed
a greater role in accommodation for young Maori heading to the city . Rural employment
was concentrated on agricultural labouring for managers and non- Maori landowners as
against the earlier practice of managing their own land. From the late 1 950s significant
areas of Maori land were afforested by the Crown and forestry companies (TPK, 1 994) .
Continued fragmentation of land titles through succession to deceased owners through the
Land Court caused many interests in land to be considered 'uneconomic' by the government
and the titles were given to the Maori Tnlstee (Firth, 1 972; Butterworth & Butterworth,
1 995) . This caused the further loss of interest in traditional lands and land use for many
Maori . Furthermore, new ownership structures such as tnlsts and incorporations have taken
over much of the other land interests by Maori .
The 1 950s and 1 960s was a period of public works boom e .g . , State housing, new roads and
motorways, hydro-electric schemes, and land development. The Maori Trustee was 'an
instrument of ensuring that Maori land was by hook or by crook brought into production,
made to pay rates and cleared of noxious weeds. ' (Butterworth & Butterworth, 1 995) .
Little regard was given to the traditional 1Y1aori understanding of land ownership.
The 1 950 Maori Purposes Act allowed for the Maori Land Court to appoint the Maori
Trustee as agent for the owners of any ' idle ' Maori land. The classification as idle was
determined if one or more of the following conditions were met:
• The land was unoccupied
• It was not properly cleared of noxious weeds
• Charging orders for unpaid rates had been made in respect of the land
• The owners had neglected to farm and manage it diligently and that it was not being
used in the interests of the owners and the public interest
• No beneficial owner could be found
These condi tions were somewhat draconian and caused strong resentment between Maori
land owners and government agencies, including the Maori Land Court and Maori Trustee .
7 9
Further issues were created by the Maori Affairs Act, 1 95 3 which included a land title
conversion programme whereby land interests worth under £25 were defined as
uneconomic and the Maori Trustee was required to buy them. These conditions were
withdrawn with the Maori Affairs Amendment Act in 1 974 (Butterworth & Butterworth,
1 995) .
In 1 952 the Board of Maori Affairs extended their financial support to cropping landowners
(hitherto they had focussed on dairy and sheep farming) as part of their role in taking over
the land development activities of the Maori Trustee and Maori Land Boards. Strict
conditions were applied to Maori wishing to gain assistance in getting their land into
horticultural production and ' only suitable men and suitable land can be considered '
(Anon. , 1 952). Cropping operations and marketing were supervised by the Department of
Maori Affairs (ibid. ) , a paternalistic approach which was the norm for that time.
In 1 958 the Department of Maori Affairs was recognising the economic limitations of some
of the land blocks under Maori ownership and advising diversification into short-term crops
such as potatoes, kfimara, pumpkins and carrots to supplement the main farm activity such
as dairy production (Falconer, 1 958) . Furthermore, the value of maintaining home gardens
to supply family needs in fruit and vegetables as well as donations to hui and tangi was
advised.
During the 1 960s the government introduced policies targeting incentives to raise farm
production levels, including horticultural exports (Sutton, 200 1 ) . The government also
provided scientific research and free advisory services through horticultural advisors,
inspectors and trainers under the Department of Agriculture. From 1 970 these formed part
of the Advisory Services Division of the Department but the service was phased out by the
government by 1 992 (ibid.) .
Treaty ofWaitangi Act
In 1 975 the Treaty of Waitangi Act was passed into legislation creating the Waitangi
Tribunal as well as official versions of the Treaty of Waitangi in the English and Maori
80
l
languages . The Tribunal was charged with looking at contel11porary claims by Maori
against the Crown for breaches of the Treaty . In 1 985 the Treaty of Waitangi Amendment
Act allowed Maori to lodge retrospective claims with the Tribunal dating back to 1 840 . A
number of pieces of legislation since this time have been lTIOre responsive to the Treaty of
Waitangi and its objectives such as the Resource Management Act 1 99 1 which requires
those administering the Act to have regard for the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi .
Whi le this does not actually state how the principles should be included, it is at the very
least an acknowledgment of the treaty at an important level of involvement in New
Zealand 's affairs.
From the mid 1 970s the establishment of incorporations to successfully manage multiple
owned Maori lands has developed into large areas of Maori land being managed under this
system. Some larger incorporation ' s (Parininihi ki Waitotara Inc. , Taranaki ; Mangatu Inc . ,
East Coast; Wakatu Inc . , Nelson; Mawhera Inc . , West Coast ; Morikaunui Inc. and Atihau
Whanganui Inc . , Wanganui) have proven to be very successful as businesses however they
do have disadvantages . Some of these are the distancing of the land from the owners
creating a loss of identity and the owners assuming their status as shareholders in the
incorporation rather than in particular blocks of land.
5.5. 5 Contemporary Society (l980s onwards)
E tipu, e rea, mo nga ra 0 tou ao ;
Ko to ringa ki nga rakau a te Pakeha
Hei ara mo to tinana
Ko to ngakau ki nga taonga a 0 tipuna Maori
He tikitiki mo to mahuna [Sir Apirana NgataJ
(Grow up 0 youth, andfulfil the needs of your generation
making use of the Piikehii skills for your material well-being,
but cherishing with pride your Miiori cultural heritage.)
The consequence of the preceding phases in colonisation is that we now have Maori crop
production systems which have more of a commercial focus rather than purely sustenance
of the people. The horticulture industry is based on both export and domestic markets and
the fresh and processed produce supports a varied industry in the wider agriculture and
8 1
primary sectors . Maori participate in the industry in varied roles; very few however are
involved in tradi tional horticul ture practices in a commercial environment .
The loss of land resources avai lable to Maori through legislation or sale over the last 1 60
years has resulted in very l ittle land suited to horticulture now being available to owners .
Most Maori land is isolated, has a low Land Use Capabil ity (LUC) (Table 5 .2) and suffers
from multiple ownership issues such as lack of capital investment, lack of a skills base, no
mandate for uti lity, or a history of leased uti li ty. In some ways the isolation can be seen as
an advantage for organic options on the land but the other i ssues remain (Roslauge, 1 996).
Table 5 .2 : Maori Land Use Capability (LUC) ratings - 1 998 (Source: MMOLDC, 1 998)
" .. !'1A�RI LAm> USE
,
CAP ABILITY (LU�) RATINGS -:- AS AT 1998 / . , .
LUC Class % total land % Maori land Description of LUC
1 0 .7 1 0.40 Most versati le multiple land use - virtual ly no
l imitations to arable use.
2 · 4 .55 2 .69 Good land with sl ight l imitations to arable use.
3 9.22 5 .75 Moderate l imitations to arable use restricting crops able
to be grown
4 1 0.3 1 9 .8 1 Severe l imitations to arable use. More suited to
pastoral and forestry.
5 0 .79 0 .038 Unsuitable for cropping - suited to pastoral or forestry.
6 27.98 34.04 Non-arable land. Moderate l imitations and hazards
when under a perennial vegetation cover
7 2 1 .45 32 . 1 9 With few exceptions can only support extensive
grazing or erosion control forestry.
8 22. 1 0 1 3 .28 Very severe l imitations or hazards for any agricultural
use
Other 2 .97 1 .43
TOTAL 100 100
Incorporations such as Wakatu in Te Tau Ihu (Northern South Island) and Trusts such as
Wi Pere Trust in Gisborne are examples of h ighly competitive and successful Maori entities
within horticulture. Wakatu manage a diverse enterprise including kiwifruit and apple
production. Their production systems are world-class and responsive to industry and
consumer demands from around the world.
82
These examples indicate a Maori involvement in the perennial fruit production sector of
horticulture . This in itself is a change from earl ier times where vegetables were the main
crops . Horticulture includes many production systems and perennial crops are generally
higher risk as they take some years to mature and fruit only once a year. Indoor crops tend
to be highly intensive and expensive to estab lish in comparison to outdoor crops but both
can be used for production of annual crops . Within the nursery, vegetable and cut-flower
sectors there are examples of Maori success . Small production units abound al l over the
country but they have a l imitation in size and investment so are often not highly visible.
What this tel ls us is that Maori are still players in the horticulture sector, although they are
no longer the key producers they once were. Maori are also starting to move from being
solely producers to a system where adding value to their crops is a key to continued
financial success. The emphasis now falls on trade as the key for production.
5.6 Examples of present-day Maori horticulture
While there are a number of constraints for Maori in the economic development of their
land resource there are some very good models of Maori land development through
horticulture which serve as an inspiration to al l Maori land owners . Most models are based
on a monocultural system such as a single horticultural crop or forestry rather than a
diverse system typical of many smal ler producers . Fol lowing are a selection of models .
5. 6. 1 Ngai Tukairangi
Ngai Tukairangi are based near Mt Maunganui in the Bay of Plenty . In 1 980 they
developed dairy land on the Matapihi Peninsula into a kiwi fruit orchard which now covers
30 canopy hectares of kiwifruit and 5 hectares of avocados. In 1 992, the Ngai Tukairangi
Trust took over the management of the land on behalf of the 5 00 owners and a board of 7
tnlstees administers the orchard. The orchard has been successful in that they are regularly
producing 1 0000 trays of count size 32 fnlit per hectare . At the time of full production "in
1 996 the b lock employed 3 ful l-time experienced staff as wel l as seasonal gangs of pickers,
pnmers and th inners .
83
5. 6. 2 ikfoteo �rust
Moteo Trust, inland of Taradale in Hawke' s Bay, has developed a 40 hectare block from
pasture into a grape orchard in partnership with a local grower after gaining approval from
its 3 1 0 owners in 1 994. The primary development included ripping a hard pan several
centimetres beneath the soil surface. The trust now employs a number of full-time staff as
well as a number of seasonal employees. The success of this venture is seen in the abi l ity
to develop a vis ion which is accepted by all the owners, assistance from government
departments, availabi lity of good advice and strong hapu leadership. Moteo Trust has
become financially independent and is supplying grapes on contract to New Zealand
winemakers .
5. 6. 3 Wi Pere Trust
The Wi Pere Trust IS based near Gisborne and owns a number of horticultural and
agricultural initiatives . Their horticulture is based around grapes (50ha), citrus (20.2ha)
and cut-flower production. During 1 998 they entered into partnership with a number of
other Maori grape growers to create Tohu Wines, a totally Maori owned enterprise who
produce wines specifical ly aimed at the export market. This trust has been sufficiently
successful to date to be able to provide education grants to their beneficiaries and continue
to make investments in their various enterprises .
5. 6. 4 Te Miira 0 Te Umutahi
Based at the Kanihi Marae near Okaiawa in South Taranaki is an example of a non-profit
garden of 1 -2ha based on traditional principles. Typical crops include corn, potatoes,
mustard and fruit trees. The basis of this land-use is the communal approach and
management, based on the historical system of gardens for Maori (Winder, 1 999) .
5. 6. 5 Tiinehopuwai Gardens, Te Kuiti
These gardens were established to raise finance for a new marae and focus on traditional or
indigenous crops such as kanga and taewa but also have some modern crops as well . They
have been building their own seed bank of taewa for several years and progressively
84
becoming more viable each sea on. Much of the labour is provided on a part-time and
voluntary basis (Smith, 2005 ) .
5.7 The social politics of horticulture
The New Zealand horticulture industry is now worth in excess of $4. 8 bi ll ion annually
(Hortresearch, 2006). Within the wider horticulture industry there are a number of sectors
which exist independently whilst contributing to the industry as a whole. The key sectors
are : fruit production, cut-flower production, nursery production, amenity horticulture,
organic production and vegetable production. There is now scope for a wide range of
horticulture production systems which are applied by growers and will di ffer because of
market, regional and resource implications. Horticulture production systems can be
classified as :
Indigenous cropping
Commodity crops
Niche crops
Outdoor production
Indoor production
• Organic' production
Market specific production
' Interest ' and ' home ' gardens (l ist drawn from Roskruge, 2004)
Maori contribute to all of the above sectors and production systems to some extent.
Maori now have a quite different relationship with land than they ever had before.
Legislation controls how Maori al ign to the land resource and how Maori manage it for any
productive system. New technology in the horticulture industry has meant the ability to
participate has become more skilled and expensive. Essential ly, horticulture is no longer
the labour intensive industry it once was . It is now highly and intensively managed to gain
the optimum outputs from a limited resource, but this comes at a price. The cost of
participation is continually increasing and those who are entrepreneurial have the
opportunity to move out of commodity production and into high-value, niche production.
85
This requires a continued developlnent of sk i l l s and knowledge relative to the specific land
use on any horticulture block. No longer i s the generic knowledge of the resource and crop
sufficient to guarantee an income. The industry has become global rather than national or
local; a major change from the production in the 1 9th and 20th centuries and one which will
continue to move in that direction .
So where do Maori fit into horticulture in the 2 1 st century? Horticulture remaIns an
economic option for Maori and Maori landowners but the processes have changed. Success
requires producers to be highly skilled managers targeting both economic and sustainable
land use incorporating technological advancements. Investment in research and
development is often the key to both creating and implementing technology in the
horticulture sector. Maori are yet to be highly visible in the modem high-value horticulture
sector in this country . This does not mean they are not there, j ust that Maori are a minority
within the industry.
Maori agriculture or horticulture as a separate entity within New Zealand is virtually non
existent in modem times. Today the Maori land base covers approximately 1 . 5 1 mill ion ha
of 'Maori freehold' land - some 4.7% of the total land mass in New Zealand, a vast
reduction from 1 840 when Maori owned 26 .9 mill ion ha of land (Table 5 .3) . An estimated
40% (600000 ha) is undeveloped or under-utilised (MMOLDC, 1 998) . Maori land is now
governed by Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1 993 , which has the ailTI of:
" . . . retention, use, development and control of Miiori land as taonga tuku iho [a
treasure from the past] by Miiori owners, their whiinau, their hapu, and their
descendants. '
86
Table 5 .3 : Maori land area by Maori Land Court (MLC) District
MLC District Total Land Maori 0/0 of Number Average
Area per ! . Land Area Maori of Land Land Area
MLC (ha) Land by Blocks . per Land
I District . Land Block (ha)
(ha) District
Tai Tokerau 1 732 1 92 1 39 873 8 .07 % 4 889 29
Waikato-Maniapoto 2 1 56 583 1 43 388 6.65 % 3 594 40
Waiariki 1 936 270 426 595 22.03 % 5 074 84
Tairawhiti 1 1 69 09 1 3 1 0 63 1 26.57 % 5 320 48
Takitimu 1 936 492 88 608 4 .58 % 1 254 7 1
Aotea 1 284 284 334 207 26.02 % 3 7 1 0 90
Te Wai Pounamu 1 6 7 1 5 1 85 7 1 769 0.43 % 1 795 40
TOTAL 26 930 100 1 5 15 071 5.63 0/0 25 636 59
Source: Maori Multiple-Owned Land Development Committee (MMOLDC), 1998 (see Appendix 3)
The Maori Land Court functions under the Department of Justice. It is presided over by a
Bench of 8 Judges including a Chief Judge and Deputy Chief Judge. Currently they look
after the interests of over 2 mil l ion ownership shares in Maori land, much of it believed to
belong to deceased or absentee owners . One of the major issues for Maori landowners is
multiple-ownership. The IVlaori Land Court imposed a tenure system based on
individual ised title and succession to land owned by Maori . S ince its inception in the
nineteenth century this has l ed to thousands of owners succeeding to land shares which are
becoming increasingly smaller as each generation passes. The government has identified
some key issues relative to multiple-owned land. These are :
• Access to finance
• The management capacity ofMaori land owning groups
• The valuation and rat ing of Maori land
• The extension and coordination of commercial facil itation services to Maori land
owners
• The identification of appropriate land use options
• The succession of owners to their entitlements, and,
• The amalgamation of Maori land blocks.
(Maori Multiple-Owned Land Development Committee, 1998)
At present a significant amount of Maori owned land remains undeveloped in a commercial
sense and is unlikely to be developed without considerable investment in the future. Maori
87
continue to become more urbanised and lack an economic base. Technology has become an
important tool in the management of Maori land regardless of its particular use. This is all
proof of their evolving to a completely different economic system from the time before
European contact.
5.8 Maori economics
What is the status of Maori horticulture in New Zealand economICS today - the 2 1 st
century? Maori freehold land still comes under the jurisdiction of the Maori Land Court
and in some cases, the Maori Trustee on behalf of absent or deceased owners . The
agricultural base for Maori is not just on Maori land however. There is a considerable
contribution to the wider primary sector of New Zealand by Maori in agriculture,
horticulture, forestry and fisheries and also to the support industries. Politically, a range of
interest groups exist for Maori . These groups are based on region, iwi or whakapapa, land
use or interest (Lambert, 2004) .
Technology is becoming more accessible to the agricultural sector - including Maori . The
use of GIS systems to document information relating to land and land use or potential is an
opportunity to empower Maori through better decision making regarding their resources as
well as improved knowledge on which to base economic decisions for their land. Other
processes of technology e.g . computer systems and programmes, email , aerial mapping and
so on all allow for improved transfer of technology and information to land owners and for
improved management systems for the land managers .
The future of Maori in the primary sector including agriculture and horticulture is secure in
the knowledge and relationship that exists for Maori with the land resource. The
reconciliation of the Maori world view with the demands of a growth-orientated cap italist
economy is essential ly the first step on the economic development path (NZIER, 2003) .
Modern economic processes can only enhance the land use options and strengthen the .
Maori position in this sector. Complimenting this positive direction is the growing demand
for other niche or traditional foods which are sourced from Maori entrepreneurs throughout
the country. Examples include pikopiko or shoots of the Asplenium bulbiferum fern and
88
fresh water crayfish - koura - wh ich can be farmed using aquaculture methods (Tait
Jamieson, 2004) .
At present, there is an alTay of environmental, economIC, social and global issues with
potential influence on Maori and the horticultural sector. The recent 'Growing for Good'
report by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment (2004) highl ights a range of
environmental issues affecting the intens ive farming industry - of which horticulture is a
part. The report identifies the following i ssues as significant risks to the primary industry :
• Intensive land management practices and fertil iser appl ication
• Escalating water demand and water qual ity issues
• Climate change impl ications and the Kyoto Protocol (the protocol agreement and
climate issues will not be discussed in the context of this thesis)
In an economIC sense, the horticultural export market is affected significantly by the
fluctuating strength of the New Zealand dollar, which affects export earnings. Additionally,
rising energy costs (i .e . carbon taxes and oil prices) and subsequent market implications
wi l l cause a ripple effect across the international and New Zealand economies.
Increased international trade and tourism, also brings with it the risk of biosecurity and
border control issues. Exotic pest infestations have the potential to seriously affect New
Zealand ' s primary industry . The Royal Society for New Zealand48 identifies that :
'A relatively isolated country like New Zealand faces a wide range of security risks,
some large, some small. There are many possible hazards and threats, and
increasingly new technological or systemic risks that could affect people, the
economy, the environment, or normal community functions. '
Furthermore, the growing genetic engineering and modification debate poses a range of
ethical issues of particular significance to Maori (Roberts, et aI. , 2004) . HorticultureNZ
acts on behalf of the industry as a lobby group and policy development agency. They note
that some of the contemporary issues affecting the horticultural industry include:
48 http ://www . rsnz.org/events/sciencesecurity/
89
• Marketing system development and restructurjng
• Transport costs and efficiency
• Quarantine and border protection
• Grading and qual i ty control of produce
• Taxation issues
• Resource management issues
• Horticultural education and training
• Research - related to both markets and production
• Industrial relations
• Export development/market access
• U se of chemicals in production systems
• Promotion of products, nationally and internationally
• Labour - ski lled and unskilled
These i ssues are equally relevant to Maori as sector participants, although it is inherent that
Maori will also apply a cultural perspective to these same issues.
Maori face specific issues in their horticultural developlnent and have unique factors to
consider (NZIER, 2003) . Maori land tenure and issues already identified with multiple
ownership continue. Furthermore, increasing Maori capacity and capability across the
economic and social sector, has been a focus of recent government campaigns. Although
the 'disparity ' gap between Maori and non-Maori has closed considerably in recent
decades, there is potential to grow key skill and knowledge bases in the sector.
Furthermore, ethical and cultural questions are becoming more prevalent in relation to
issues ranging from genetic modification to land and water management.
Importantly, the overriding issue for any Maori horticultural development is the
incorporation of the holistic Maori worldview into horticultural development. This aspect
differentiates Maori from other producers, and places unique demands on Maori, and also
provides benefits and opportunities associated with this 'uniqueness ' (e .g . niche marketing)
(Lambert, 2004) .
90
5.9 Organics
Many Maori horticulturists have chosen to align to the organic sector because they believe
that conceptually, it meets their ideals in land and food management practices . This is
evidence of Maori increasingly providing appropriate cultural responses to environmental
i ssues and organic horticultural and agricultural systems are no exception. Organics is a
production system in horticulture which came about as a response to the chemical
management techniques of the early twentieth century. Technically it is not based on any
indigenous system but it does appear to fit better with indigenous groups because of the
mix of management techniques it employs.
S ince 2002, Maori involvement in the organic industry has continued to evolve. Organics
to Maori is not just in horticulture and agriculture but also sectors such as tuna (eel),
seaweed extract, flax crafts and rongoa (medicines). Maori are party to all the national
initiatives related to the organic industry and much of their involvement is complimented
by the advancement of indigenous elements to their production systems and also to
marketing. There is considerable interest by Maori and other indigenous peoples to
col laborate on their management systems and marketplace options to promote traditional
factors uti lised in all aspects of their businesses. Many Maori have aligned to these organIc
systems because of their apparent l inks to traditional systems and the tikanga which is
appl ied to the resources throughout any utility . For Maori , it is the tikanga or culturally
accepted methods appl ied to production that is important and organic systems appear to
better align to traditional tikanga (Roskruge, 2002).
9 1
5.10 Chapter summary
Horticulture in Maori society has changed considerably from what it was in pre-European
times . Maori were very responsive to the economic opportunities which presented
themselves with the introduction of the settler economy. They adapted their land-use ski lls
and crop choices to meet the needs of the market and supplied produce accordingly. In the
mid-nineteenth century, it was only the change of emphasis to defending their land which
saw the demise of horticulture, followed by the processes of the Native Land Court and a
move to pastoral ism with the advent of individual ownership of land and a refrigerated
transport system.
In the 20th century Maori endured varied impacts on themselves, their society and the asset
base which they owned. Aside from the ongoing effects of colonisation and the impact of
the (now) Maori Land Court, there was the loss of l eadership through the two world wars .
Urbanisation in the 1 950s and 1 960s meant that the rural Maori community was relocating
and along with it the horticultural activities of keeping whanau and hapu gardens was being
diminished. Very few examples of traditional community gardens now exist and the
present generation of young Maori are relatively unfami liar with horticulture.
In recent years the resurgent interest in indigenous systems and knowledge has contributed
to a greater awareness of Maori horticulture as a core activity within Maori culture and
Maori are now looking to renew their application of value systems through actions such as
kaitiakitanga with regard to the land resource.
92
Chapter 6 : Key crops in Maori Horticulture
Te utu kei runga, te uht kei raro
Kei tara wiwini, kei tara wawana.
Mihi mai koe, tangi mai koe.
I tou kiri, ka ripiripia, ka taetaea
Tau te hue, ka haehaea
Ki te taha 0 te umu, i te matai na,
Umaka whakawhano, ki roto ki te kakano
No hue, tau.
[Traditional (pre-European) karakia recited by Maia of Rongowhakata
as he planted his hue at plantations around Taruheru, Gisbome]
6. 1 Introduction
This chapter introduces a number of horticultural plants which featured in traditional Maori
society . They provide the basis for a body of knowledge or matauranga al igned to
tradi tional horticulture and which is available wi thin the Maori community for reference
and/or application in contemporary times . The information contained within this chapter is
indicative of the breadth of tradi tional horticultural knowledge and appl ication in Maori
society . The following crops can be considered the key crops in traditional Maori society
however; other plants and crops not identified here may have featured in pre-European
times and are no less important because of thei r absence in this thesis.
Not all cultivated plants in the Maori garden were, or are, solely for eating; several plants
were grown for their. utility value such as harakeke (NZ flax) - used for weaving and textile
production, aute grown for its use in making cloth and, hue or (bottle )gourds which were
dried and used as containers . There was also the availability of food stores from
'uncultivated' plants such as aruhe (femroot) and berries or fruit of tree crops such as the
hlnau (Elaeocarpus dentatus) and miro (Prumnopitys ferruginea) which were often located
near to settlements and harvested in much the same way as cultivated plants . Whilst these
crops were considered uncultivated, they were no less managed to ensure maximum
production of the harvested plant parts e .g. the timing of harvest or minimising competition
between plants for the best quality produce.
93
6.2 Kiimara - Ipomoea batatas (Sweetpotato)
Kumara is the col lective noun for the sweetpotat049 . Buck ( 1 954) noted the name kumar
exists in the Kechua dialect of Northern Peru for the sweetpotato and has probably
contributed to the generic name kfimara used around Polynesia. Leach ( 1 989) states that
kiimara or sweetpotato is the only South American p lant in the inventory of indigenous
plants grown by pre-European Maori . Early visitors to this country identified sweetpotato
(kumara) as the most prominent crop being grown by Maori in northern districts (Yen,
1 963 ; Best, 1 976; Jones, 1 989) . Kumara production was adapted by Maori to grow the
crop in our temperate cl imate . In New Zealand both the pre and post-European cultivars of
kiimara are not known to flower50, and in fact, efforts to induce flowering have not been
successful (Yen, 1 963) . This means that all varieties are propagated vegetatively . The
kiimara p lant is tolerant of salt winds, drought and lower fertility in soils, thus making it
quite suitable to the sand and silt loarns of much of the coastal fringe in New Zealand. It
was not very successful however in much of the South Island because of the cooler cl imate
but was grown is pockets such as D'Urvi lle Island, Waimea district, Karamea on the West
Coast and Kaikoura, Kaiapoi, Wairewa (Lake Ellesmere) and Banks Peninsula on the east
coast of the South Island (Rigg & Bruce, 1 923 ; Gregory, 1 976; Challis, 1 976; Jacomb, .
1 994; Bassett et al. , 2004: Mitchell & Mitchell, 2004). It was however, also considered a
difficult crop to grow in the Central North Island because of the severity of frosts and short
growing seasons experienced there - except in some microclimates on river terraces with
alluvial soils (Williams & Walton, 2003) .
Traditional production of kiimara is immersed in tikanga or customs expressed as ritual,
karakia (prayers and incantations) , and sacred behaviour because of the tapu accorded to
the crop . Te Atiawa are said to have deified Rakeiora, a tohunga who arrived on the
Tokomaru waka, into a kiimara god and they shared this god with Ngati Ruanui in later
times (Smith, 1 9 1 0) . Other tribes had their own deities . Considerable effort was given to
preparing sites which would benefit kiimara production such as the digging of channels to'
49 To distinguish this crop from the tuberous potato (Solanum tuberosum) the common English name is now
written as one word and is accepted convention internationally (Lewthwaite, 2004; lanick 1 978) .
50 An exception is the testimony ofT G Hammond who ONCE saw a kUmara p lant in flower in Kaeo in 1 883 ,
Northland during the mid nineteenth century (Hammond, 1 894).
94
drain soils in Northland (Barber, 1 984) . Early production systems were based on 'pieces '
of kiimara with shoots being cut and planted rather than the process of tipulshoot
production which is the procedure used today (Berridge, 1 9 1 3 & 1 9 1 4 ; Yen, 1 96 1 ; Best,
1 976). Plants were placed in ridges or mounds and tended to rel igiously throughout the
growing period (generally from November to the following March) . Berridge ( 1 9 1 3) also
states that 'an almost general cessation of war was accepted at the harvest '.
Harvest, grading and storage of the kUmara crop were equally important activities, also
steeped in tikanga practices. In the tropical Pacific, kUrnara was continuously harvested
year-round as it was needed and there was no need for specific storage techniques to be
employed. The temperate and seasonal climate of New Zealand required Maori to adapt
their management of the crop to ensure it was accessible throughout the year. Yen ( 1 96 1 )
noted that i n no kiimara growing region within New Zealand had he encountered over
wintering of kumara in the field or in propagating beds of previous seasons. This
observation was supported by over-wintering trials at several sites around New Zealand
where the kiimara failed to survive the winter season.
It is beiievea there were several cultivars of pre-European kUmara cultivars of which only a
handful survive and are grown today. The modern cultivars are sports of earl ier
sweetpotato cultivars (mostly American varieties) which have gained favour with
consumers and producers al ike (Coleman, 1 972 ; Yen, 1 974) . Te Aupouri iwi of Northland
talk of a variety known to them as Taputini which was less precocious than other varieties
and upon harvest they used to score it with toheroa shells, s it the tubers on rocks to dry in
the sun and breeze and then pack into kits which they hung in pataka or storehouses. From
this activity the settlement of Te Kao got its name; kao being in reference to processing
dried kiimara5 1 .
Broughton ( 1 979) gives tamamore as an ancient name for kiimara used by the Nga Ratiru
tribe of South Taranaki . There were a considerable number of recognised varieties of
5 1 Key points from story retold by Mr Toro Ihaka, kaumatua ofTe Aupouri, 1 992.
95
kilmara grown in pre-European times and these have now been supplemented with the
introduction of American strains of sweetpotato, probably introduced by American whalers
(Gillard, 1 965 : Coleman, 1 969 & 1 972) .
6.3 Hue -Lagenaria siceraria (bottle gourd) [Lagenaria vulgaris - Best, 1 976]
1-1 e karakia w h a k a m a h u tanga, mo nga hue, me ka t a o n a ; ka u r u a te u m u ,
ka karakia te wahine mana e tao te umu, ka mea.
Te tamariki kaitangi hue, Pu te hue, tanu te hue, tupu te hue, Toro te kawai, whanaua.
Whanaua, kia tini, whanaua, kia mano, whanaua, kia rea52.
One of the key crops prior to European colonisation in New Zealand; hue is an annual crop
that belongs to the Cucurbitaceae fami ly of plants with a prostrate and spreading growth
habit common to these p lants (pumpkins, cucumbers, melons etc . ) . Smith ( 1 9 1 0) recorded
that hue was the only crop to succeed from the original introductions by Maori prior to the
migration phase of the 1 4th century. Hammond ( 1 924) stated that it was introduced to
Aotearoa as seed from the cargo of the Tainui waka during the migrations . It was a dual
purpose plant; the mature fruit was variously used and young immature hue (kotawa) were
eaten when the skin and flesh of the fruit were soft - generally around January and
February (Yen, 1 974) . It has been suggested that the young leaves and growing tips [tohihi]
of the plants were also eaten and possibly the dried seeds as well (Maingay, 1 985) . The
physiology of the plant was well understood with terms applied to all the plants '
components including the cotyledons which emerge from the seed and were known as
piitangaroa.
Dried fruit were uti lised as food bowls, bailers, water vessels (ipu) , floats and storage
containers and also for cooking containers (Maingay, 1 985 ; Best, 1 976; Clarke, 2006) and
small hue occasionally used for musical instruments53 (similar to drum or flute) and tops
(Maingay, 1 985) or rattles as amusements. In this instance, mature fruit were selected, left
on the vine and sat on a base of dried grass while the fruit matured and the outer rind dried
52 Source: Ko nga moteatea, me nga hakirara 0 nga Maori
(www. vuw.ac .nzllibrarylsubjectguides/maoristudies/websites/waiata.aspx) accessed 24 November 2006
53 Hue Puruhau - gave a deep vibrating sound; Hua Puruwai - a rain sound; Poiawhiowhio - imitated bird
noises; and Koauau Ponga Ihu - small gourd used similar to a flute. Also Nguru or nose flute (Burtenshaw,
1 999).
96
and hardened over a period of months. Some practi tioners note the old traditional method
of curing gourds by burying thelTI in warm dry sand for 4-5 months to let the moisture drain
out to the sand as still being the best method (Schoon, 1 962). The hue was widely grown
around New Zealand in pre-European times however; it does best in places with long,
warm summers and has not been very successful at higher altitude or much of the South
Island due to the colder temperatures and limited summer periods. Newman ( 1 903) states it
was seldom seen growing to lTIaturity south of the Bay of Plenty .
Hue were traditionally planted during the maramataka phases of Tunl and Rakaunui54
(Best, 1 976; Schoon, 1 962) however Tregear ( 1 904) identified the maramataka phases of
Rakaunui and Rakaumatoi as the preferred planting days55 . It was the only crop in
traditional times that was raised from seed known as kakano (Colenso, 1 880; Best 1 976;
Barratt, 1 979); all other crops were raised vegetatively . Colenso ( 1 880) ; Papakura ( 1 93 8) ;
Best ( 1 976), and Maingay ( 1 985) a l l introduce the concept of priming hue seed by placing
them in fern within a basket and soaking in running water for a few days prior to planting
and this practise was known as whakarau. The crop was planted in depressions, usual ly
cultivated in the banks of streams and rivers and protected from the weather with cut scrub .
Young fruit on the hue were lifted and cined grass put underneath to protect them while
they were growing and maturing.
As in kumara production, there are considerab le tikanga or cultural practices al igned to the
successful production of hue. Maingay ( 1 985) suggests that substantial soil modification
was often undertaken to encourage early growth, strong plants and fruit. This included the
addition of charcoal and/or ash to discrete areas of soil before planting and sometimes the
construction of mounds for planting inclusive of carefully positioned stones or rocks,
charcoal and burnt twigs .
Best ( 1 902 : 6 1 ) commented on a relationship between hue management and harvesting wild
mushrooms; possibly alluding to a toxin involuntarily carried between plants. He wrote :
54 The 1 4th and 1 5th nights of the maramataka Maori (calendar).
55 The 1 5 th and 1 6th nights of the maramataka Maori (calendar).
97
'A curious superstition is connected with this plant [the tawaka; a variety of
Agaricus mushroom) : if a person has eaten of the tawaka he is not allowed to go
into the hue or gourd plant cultivations, for if he did so all the fruit of the gourd
vines would decay prematurely. ,
Hue are protected by the god or atua Pu-te-hue, a child of Tane (Best, 1 976 & 1 99sa) and
as such required strict ritual during planting and harvest. Pu-te-hue is quoted as saying :
'the seeds within me shall provide water vessels for my descendants ' as she gave herself to
the people, specifically a tribe known as Ngali Toi, the first to cultivate the hue (Schoon,
1 962). Best also gives kowenewene or wenewene as alternative names for the hue in the
East Coast Ngati Porou district. See Appendix 4 for a list of vernacular names .
The hue is known to many Pakeha as the Polynesian bottle gourd and its ' ongms and
movements through various continents and cultures have been studied to add to the body of
knowledge about the movements of the Polynesian peoples and potential relationships
between the Americas and Polynesia over the last 1 000 years (Whitaker & Carter, 1 954;
Sorenson, 2005) . Clarke et af. (2006) have determined there are two possible origins for
the hue in Aotearoa; via the Americas or via Asia. Science favours the American route and
suspects post-European introductions of the Asian gourd accounts for hybridisation of the
traditional Maori cultivar since colonisation. The plant itself is now ascribed to African
origins based on the known existence of a wild population there as against cultivated
populations of the crop elsewhere (ibid).
6.4 Uwhi/Uhi -Dioscorea a/ala (yam)
The yam is acknowledged as one of the vegetables introduced to Aotearoa during the time
of the migration of Maori from Hawaiiki . Several varieties of yam are known to have been
cultivated throughout Polynesia and St John ( 1 954) stated:
'Such a widespread dispersal implies its esteem by the early Polynesian colonists.
Its tubers, of course, were easily carried. When once planted in the forest, they
would persist and multiply and maintain a food supply available for residents or
occasional voyagers. '
The traditional variety of yam (D. alata) is believed to have been grown extensively in New
Zealand in former times but now it is not found anywhere, including heritage plantings
98
throughout the country. The j ournal of Banks from Cook's voyage of 1 769 and Cook ' s
later correspondence mentions the yam or uwhi identifying that i t was being grown in the
Bay of Islands area relatively extensively at that time (Begg & Begg, 1 969). The uwhi had
a long growing season (9- 1 2 months) and was susceptible to frosts and this limited where it
was grown. The introduction of the potato hastened the demise of the yam in Maori
horticulture because the former was a much easier grown crop. Shawcross ( 1 967a) noted it
was still a relatively common crop in Northland in the 1 820s. Leach ( 1 983) stated that by
1 844 the original yam was nearly forgotten and in Northland the term uwhi was taken to
mean winter grown potatoes .
Barber ( 1 984:29) quotes from a letter written by a Mr George Graham, corresponding with
Mr H D Skinner, an early Northland ethnographer. In 1 922 Graham wrote [in reference to
artificial drains isolated in the Kaitaia region] :
'1 myself have seen such drains for growing the uwhi (yam) and taro in the Kaipara.
The drains were also used as eel preservers, and weirs were built in them . . . such
places however, are ideal for the taro . . . and also the uwhi - a kind of yam, now
perhaps extinct. 1 last saw it growing at Tauhara [North Kaipara Heads] about
1885. '
6.S Tii / Kouka - Cordyline spp. (cabbage tree)
Ehara i te tii e wana ake.
Not like the tii tree whose life persists (Best, 1 908).
Several species of the tii, kouka or cabbage tree (the name given to the plant by Captain
Cook) were used for food and other activities by early Maori . It is well recognised that the
cabbage tree was cultivated by Maori near their settlements as a food crop (Walsh, 1 900;
Rudman, 1 992; Park, 1 995 ; Simpson, 2000) . Different cultivars of tii or cabbage tree were
grown in different regions for their specific uses and the cultivated groves were aligned to
the food utility of the plant rather than other uses. Primari ly, cuttings were taken from
offsets on the rhizomes known as Tiipara to establish new plants or crops . These cuttings
were known as kopura, included a piece of both the stem and root and were ready to
harvest in 1 2 months (Tregear, 1 904). Fankhauser ( 1 982 ; 1 986 & 1 990) & Matthews
( 1 988) have both noted that the remains of large ovens (pits) known as umu-tii specifically
used for the cooking of tii can still be found in parts of the South Island. There were
99
several types of umu-tii used for specific purposes, of which many examples have been
recorded by archaeologists and also compared to umu-tii of Eastern Polynesia which are
remarkably similar in construction (Knight, 1 966).
The tii i s renowned for its abil ity to defy death and to l ive on or regenerate from any
situation. The plant has the ability to produce a leafy shoot at each leaf axil, particularly
after any damage or internal rot. The tel l-tale circle of cabbage trees often seen in the
landscape is the result of the underground rhizomes sprouting after the death of the original
tree above ground. The well-known proverb warning against gossip al ludes to the qualities
of the cabbage tree : He uru a ki, he wana te tii, ke rito te tii [the spoken word reappears,
just like the tii sprouts again] .
The tii had a range of uses (Table 6 . 1 ) including use of the coarse leaves for thatching, rope
making, wrapping and weaving, using the heart leaves as a vegetable or the edible rhizome
or root of some varieties (known as pUhanga) as a food and source of both carbohydrates
and sugars (Fankbauser, 1 990) . Taylor ( 1 966) gives the name mauku (used in the Waikato
district) to the processed roots and likened their flavour to liquorice. Other tribes refer to
the processed roots as kouru or kiiuru. The roots were only harvested in late spring and
summer when the maximum amount of carbohydrates were within the plant (ibid). Dried
roots were often stored for long periods in pataka for use out of season. Tregear ( 1 904 :98)
explained the harvest and processing of the roots as follows:
'The plants were dug up, stacked in piles, and dried in the sun. The fibrous roots
were burned off while drying. When dry the roots were scraped and slowly baked
for from 12 to 18 hours. They were either chewed at once, or pounded, washed and
squeezed to extract the sugar which was contained in great quantity, partially
crystallised among the fibres of the root. The sugar was eaten as a relish with fem
root. '
The sugar type (mainly fructose) found in tii roots exists in levels higher than that found in
sugarcane or sugarbeet making it a very sweet food product (Fankhauser & Brasch, 1 985 ;
Fankhauser, 1 990). I t was considered an important food source in the South Island where
kUmara did not grow easily. For most tribes the sugar product was used as a klnaki or
rel ish with fern-root or kanga wai (also known as kanga pirau or fermented corn) and also
as a sweetener with water.
1 00
The edible stems of the Tii -para variety of tii , known as kouru, were a primary food source
for some Ngai Tahu settlelnents (Anon, 1 93 1 ; Anderson, 1 998) and also the Northland
tribes (Best, 1 976) . Today only the rito or heart leaves of ti i are used as a seasonal ' green '
by some Maori and this practice i s becoming less common amongst the younger
generations. Raw kouka or heart leaves (known as koata or komata56) were also eaten to
aid digestion of fatty foods such as tuna (eels) and muttonbirds (Simpson, 2000) . Various
parts of the tii also had medicinal uses, but this application is rarely used today due to
modem medicines and alternative management for health problems . The fibre of the leaves
was renown for its robustness and use in making ropes (called aka-ti i), snares for catching
b irds and water fowls, paraerae or sandals and other items of clothing including leggings
(whakapuru), capes and wai st mats (Scheele, 2002).
Table 6 . 1 : Varieties of Ti i (cabbage tree) in New Zealand and their uses.
Drawn from Tregear, 1 904; Beattie, 1 949; Best , 1 976 & Simpson, 2000.
Maori name Botanical name Uses
Tii papa (Tii para, Ti i tahanui, Tii Cordyfine pumilio Eating, especially the saccharine
koraha, Mauku) Pygmy or dwarf cabbage tree roots
Tii rauriki [North land]
Tii kouka (whanake) e australis re fruticosa) Eating, thatching, cordage
Tii pore e terminalis Prized for the root as a food
source. Propagated vegetatively.
Tii kapu (Toi) e indivisa Tap root & upper part of trunk
(Titoi in Ngati Mamoe dialect) Broad leafed or mountain cabbage tree used as food
Tii tawhiti [Taranaki district) Cordyline spp. Stems used as a food
probably e australis Kirki i Dwarf & non-flowering variety
Tii ngahere (Tii kapu, Tii torere, e banksii Inner part of tap root used as a
Tii parae) Forest cabbage tree food
Tii kouka (Poor Knights & Three e kaspar
Kings cabbage tree)
During the late 1 980s and 1 990s, a disease afflicting cabbage trees became apparent across
the northern half of the North Island which turned out to be responsible for the sudden
death of thousands of trees . In 1 99 1 , the then DSIR identified a mycoplasma like organism
as the culprit for the disease which was being transmitted by sap feeding insects such as a
native leaf hopper. This bacterium disease is the same one causing yel low leaf disease in
56 Personal communication, Mr Te Uri Hautapu & Mrs Christina Kawau, pakeke 0 Te Whanau a Ruataupare,
March 2003 .
1 0 1
harakeke and dieback in karamu trees (Rudman, 1 992; Beever et al. , 1 996; Beever, 2002) .
The situation highlighted the role of cabbage trees in New Zealand landscapes and the
impact of environmental factors on their continuing presence in the wild and on pastoral
properties .
6.6 Taro - Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott
[referred to as coccos/cocos in antiquity]
Taro is one of the p lants said to have been introduced to Aotearoa at the time of the Maori
migration from Hawaiiki. A number of stories exist as to the origin of taro and how Maori
came to be in possession of it prior to their migration across the Pacific. It is often referred
to as ' the food of chiefs ' - he kai rangatira - (Hammond, 1 924) and this indicates the status
gi ven to the crop by earlier generations. The New Zealand taro (as distinct from the
tropical or island taro) has certainly diminished as a favoured crop by Maori , and is not
often seen in gardens of today; rather it is more l ikely to be found growing wild near
streams and old water-courses. The natural habitat of wild taro is generally in wet and
warm situations such as permanent streams, waterfal ls in tropical rainforest or permanent
spnngs or seepages in monsoonal savannah (Matthews & Terauchi , 1 994; Matthews,
1 997).
The New Zealand taro (Colocasia esculenta) i s a temperate variety of the taro which is
grown throughout Oceania and Asia. It is commonly understood that taro was introduced
to Aotearoa during the migration of Maori from Hawaiiki (Best, 1 976; Hammond, 1 924;
Matthews, 1 985 ; Stowell, 2002) . Tribes of Te Tai Hauauru believe the taro was sourced
from another island called Wairua-ngangana about seven generations prior to their tiipuna
leaving Hawaiiki for this country (Hammond, 1 924). Their waka, the Aotea, is said to have
carried two varieties of taro to the new country; tutahi and whakatauere (ibid. ) . It was one
of the main cultivated crops of pre-European Maori society, said to be second in
importance to kUmara for cultivated crops (Best, 1 976). The taro however was displaced
during the introduction of European crops which were easier to grow and supply to markets
and probably preferred in their flavour and cooking qualities. Shawcross ( 1 967a) identified
taro as still being an important crop for Bay of Island Maori as late as 1 83 5 and that the rate
1 02
of decline was slow over the first four decades of the nineteenth century . Best ( 1 922) noted
that by 1 900 Maori had almost ceased to cultivate taro in their fields .
Both the leaves and the corms were used for cooking and eating. Best (ibid. ) also identified
the leaf stalk or petiole, known as whawha taro, as a favoured edible portion of the taro
plant. Generally no tapu procedures were applied to the production of taro as a crop (Yen,
1 974) and it was not stored with other root crops in rua (storage pits) , but stored above
ground covered by bracken. In the warm northern districts taro was considered as a
perennial plant and the tuber or corms could be dug all year as necessary for use thus
making this a useful plant for out-of-season produce. Further south, for example in
Taranaki, the taro was described as limited in quantity and never extensive enough to
provide continuous supply, thus requiring assiduous management (Buck, 1 949) .
6.7 Aute (Maro) -Broussonetia papyrifera (paper mulberry)
The aute or paper mulberry was a cultivated shrub or small tree, not for food but for its bark
(Buck, 1 954; Harnrnond, 1 924) which was used for the manufacture of tapa like cloth,
clothing materials and bandages. The bark of the tree was also used for making kites known
as IVianu-aute. It is a dioecious plant (male and female flowers on different trees) and is
general ly grown from vegetative cuttings or suckers . The plant was said to have been
brought to Aotearoa by Maori during the migration from Hawaiiki on the waka Oturereao
(Evans, 1 997) but it stnlggled to survive in the cooler, temperate climate and eventual ly
died out of cultivation . At the time of Cook ' s visit to this country in 1 769 only a few aute
shnlbs were observed in the Bay of Islands and these were specimen trees rather than uti lity
trees (Hindmarsh, 1 999). Banks and Solander - melnbers of Cook' s expedition - col lected
a specimen of aute describing it as 'in parte sep ten trionalis, culta sed rara ' (in northern
parts [of the country], cultivated but rare) (Simpson & De Lange, 1 992).
Matthews ( 1 996) in an essay on the use and dispersal of paper mulberry in the Pacific
Islands states :
'In the North Island of New Zealand, the paper mulberry was widely cultivated
before the arrival of the Europeans. In 1844 the destruction of paper mulberry by
European cattle in the Hokianga district was reported by E.M Patuone in a letter
1 03
cited by Colenso. . . . . . . the plant became extinct soon after 1844. . . . . . . Numerous
factors could have contributed to cultivar extinction in New Zealand: (i) a decline
in cultivation for social reasons. (ii) destnlction by newly introduced herbivores
(cattle, sheep and others), (iii) an inability to breed and disperse by seed, because
only one sex was introduced, or because male and female plants were introduced to
different parts of the country, (iv) loss of flowering ability because of mutations
accumulated over a long period of vegetative propagation and cultivation, (v)
previous adaptation to tropical conditions, leading to weak vegetative growth in the
temperate climate of New Zealand, and (vi) an accumulation of pathogens or
harmfitl mutations leading to weak vegetative growth. No evidence is available
regarding the last four possibilities. '
The Marutiiahu tribes of Hauraki have a tradition around the aute confirming the existence
of the plant in traditional gardens until the early twentieth century. Royal (2007) states :
'According to Hauraki tradition, the aute was brought from central Polynesia to
Hauraki on the Tainui canoe. However, only a small plantation, Te Uruaute-o
Marama-tahanga (Maramas aute grove), was grown. Planted at Waihihi in Western
Hauraki, it flourished until the beginning of the 20th century. This gave rise to the
saying 'Haere mai ki Hauraki, he aute te awhea ' (Come to Hauraki where the aute
tree survived) which refers to the great fertility and mana of Hauraki. '
6.8 TaewalPeruperulRiwaiJParareka - Solanum tuberosum (Maori potatoes)
The taewa or Maori potato is known by a number of generic names which vary according to
tribe and dialect around the country (taewa, peruperu [Northland] , parareka [Ngati Porou],
mahetau [Ngai Tahu] , rlwai ; refer to Appendix 5 for a full list of vernacular names) . There
are a number of different beliefs regarding the origin of taewa in New Zealand and the
route they took to get here. Many Maori believe there were cultivars of taewa here before
European explorers such as Cook made contact. Richards ( 1 993) reviewed the recorded
information on the existence of a Captain Stivers who is said to have visited the northern
coast of New Zealand and introduced (either wittingly or unwittingly) the potato which the
local Maori called taewa as a trans literation of his name.
Captain James Cook is credited with the earliest recorded introduction of potatoes to New
Zealand. On his first voyage and contact in November 1 769 he visited Mercury Bay in the
Coromandel region. Te Horeta Te Taniwha was a child at the time but his recollections in
old age included:
'Cook then gave two handfitls of potatoes to the old chief [Toiawa] , a gift of
profound importance to the Maoris. By tradition these potatoes were planted at
1 04
Hunua where, after cultivation for 3 years, a feast was held and a general
distribution made. ' (Begg & Begg, 1 969 : 36)
The tribes of Queen Charlotte Sound make reference to a variety called Te Winiharete
which they believe descends from Cook ' s introduction. It is generally accepted that taewa
were not brought as cargo during the migrations of Maori to Aotearoa but how they arrived
is an interesting point. Some believe that chance visits by trading vessels (unrecorded)
which had earlier visited South America are responsible for the introduction of taewa
(Richards, 1 993) . Other tribes hold beliefs that taewa were sourced by their own people
from the bush or through other obscure processes . Nga Rauru of South Taranaki claim the
cultivar Tatairongo was obtained from the underworld by their tupuna Te Reke Tatairongo
(Hammond, 1 924) . Lieutenant King, Governor of Norfolk Island is known to be a catalyst
in the introduction of a range of exotic flora and fauna to the northern districts during a visit
to New Zealand in 1 793 (Shawcross, 1 967a) . Aside from presents of tools and implements,
King is credited with the introduction of the European or 'white ' potato which is said to
have had an 'immediate influence on the food producing and dietary habits of the Miioris
associated with these travellers '. (Shawcross, 1 967a: 1 42)
Ivan Simonov, the astronomer with the Russian expeditionary Bellings-hausen wrote in his
journal on their interaction and trading with local Maori at Queen Charlotte Sound in 1 820.
On investigating some cultivated ground he commented that :
' . . . there we found . . . a long row of baskets containing potatoes, just dug up. We
took a few with us; on boiling them, we found them very tasty and not inferior to
[the] English potato. ] (Barratt, 1 979: 82; Hindmarsh, 1 994:75)
Taewa or Maori potato ultimately replaced (or displaced) the traditional crops such as
kiimara and aruhe as the primary carbohydrate and subsistence crop produced by Maori for
their own use (Morris , 1 900; Walsh, 1 902; Yen, 1 96 1 ; Yen 1 962; Hargreaves, 1 963; Best,
1 976; Barratt, 1 979; Roskruge, 1 999) some calling it the :
' . . . greatest gift of the European to the Miiori agriculturist . . . which by 1835 was
much more in use than any native vegetable ] (Hargreaves, 1 963 : 1 03) .
In comparison to many of the other crops grown by Maori, taewa had a high labour
requirement which was able to be met by Maori communities at the time and yielded a
1 05
plentiful return for the labour input (Firth, 1 972). The potatoes were grown in a similar
fashion to the production of kUmara which Maori were very adept at and thus they became
experts in production in a very short time. Localised variations in cultivation such as the
planting of crops by Tuhoe of the Bay of Plenty in l ight scrub as early as June to shelter
young growth from frosts were common (ibid) .
Harris (2006) recorded the effects of a potato blight (Phytopthera infestans or late blight)
epidelnic on Maori communities during the 1 905 -07 period. The spread of the disease
decimated the traditional potato crops on which many Maori were rel iant as their key
carbohydrate source and considerable effort was appl ied to introducing new potato seed and
other crops into the Maori gardens of the time .
Today taewa are produced using the same processes and technology as commercial potato
crops . During the early colonisation perio taewa were a key crop in Maori economic
development. They provided a marketable product which sold readily and was in
continuous demand both in this country and Australia. This intensification of horticultural
demand contributed to the large areas brought into production during the rapid colonisation
of the nineteenth century (Yen, 1 962) .
Plate 2 : Sample varieties of taewa (Solanum spp . )
6.9 Kanga -Zea mays (Indian corn/maize)
The maize or Indian corn originates in the Americas and is important in food, feed and
industrial crops worldwide (Neuffer et a!. , 1 968 ; Heiser, 1 973) . Known to Maori as kiinga
it is one of the primary crops in Maori horticulture and has a variety of uses. It is one of the
crops introduced during the early decades of the contact period between Maori and
explorers such as Cook, du Fresne and sealers, whalers and traders . It is said that while
Maori were adept enou�h to learn how to grow grain crops, hitherto unknown in their
1 06
horticulture systems, they were not shown the accepted methods of using the grains at
harvest (this applied mainly to wheat) . After attempting to eat the dried grain the response
was to discard the grains and return to their usual crops . When they were eventually shown
the best methods for growing, grinding and utilising maize [and other grains] , it then
became an important crop and Maori set about creatively using the produce in both fresh
and processed ways to supplement their diet. Best ( 1 974) stated that the tribes of the Bay
of Islands were the first to acquire maize which came to them from Governor King of New
South Wales in the 1 790s. It was the influence of the missionaries in the early nineteenth
century that consolidated maize and wheat as important crops alongside the flour and bread
products they contributed to (Hargreaves, 1 963) . Shawcross ( 1 967a) adds that by the
decade of the 1 830s, corn rivalled potatoes as the chief Maori produced crop for home and
European consumption.
Leach ( 1 983) noted that maize was :
, . . . the only cereal to be fully accepted in Polynesian horticulture, but not without
repeated introductions. '
Leach commented that maize was treated akin to bamboo and grasses across Polynesia and
usually roasted immature within the husks until cooking pots were freely available. Early
maize production was considered a trial and error process and it didn ' t become widespread
and accepted as a crop until about 1 8 1 3 (Hargreaves, 1 963) .
Kanga crops, as in modern maize and corn varieties, must accumulate considerable heat
units to achieve maturity and are therefore more suited to the regions which experience
long dry summers such as northern regions of the North Island, Hawke' s Bay and
Canterbury. Anderson ( 1 998) noted maize being grown by Maori at Kararoa north of
Hokitika on the West Coast in 1 846. There are several varieties of kanga grown by Maori,
many with names that have now been forgotten and which would be considered as mutants
by maize breeders worldwide. Yen ( 1 959) commented that as the seed was relatively
inconsistent in producing the same quality of cobs year by year, the names were not
retained in the same way they were for other crops . The white kemelled variety is
considered by some to be the best for processing. One white variety with large kernels was
1 07
known as Niho Hoiho (Horse teeth) and is still grown in some parts of the country. There
are also black cultivars (referred to by Yen [ 1 959] and also grown in recent Massey
University trials), red cultivars, yellow cultivars - which are the most common grown in
Maori gardens, and a mottled variety which is assumed to be a product of cross pollination.
All these variations of colour and quality in maize are generically known as mutants and
occur in cropping systems worldwide (Neuffer et aI. , 1 968) . Popcorn (kiinga pakaru) was
also a popular crop for many Maori families in past generations and was grown in the same
way as kanga57 .
Plate 3 : Sample varieties of kanga (Zea mays)
6.10 Kamokamo58 - Cucurbitaceae family
(believed to be Cucurbita pepo cv kamokamo)
Kamokamo is a variant of the cucurbita, similar to the marrow (Cucurbita pepo L) . It is a
fast growing summer annual plant believed to have been introduced during the early years
of settlement in the 1 8th and 1 9th centuries. There are several distinct varieties of
kamokamo which have probably arisen from cross pollination, seed selection and isolation
57 Various informants: Ngati Porou, Atiawa, Ngapuhi, Mataatua and Ngati Kahungunu.
58 Some suggest the name kamokamo is derived as a transliteration of cucumber (Anon communication, 2006)
1 08
over several decades . Many whanau and marae jealously guard their own kamokamo seed
to ensure they continue to grow their preferred variety. For Maori, kamokamo is a
favourite vegetable generally eaten as an immature fruit and used to accompany pUha or as
a base for penupenu, a mash of vegetables prepared for infants . It is sometimes marketed
as kumikumi (Gourley, 1 996) . Early crops are harvested from December onwards around
the Bay of Plenty and later crops will fruit through to late summer in more southern
districts .
Plate 4 : Sample of kamokamo (Cucurbita spp. )
6.1 1 Rengarenga / Maikaika -Arthropodium cirratum (rock lily)
The rengarenga is a New Zealand native plant which colonises coastal areas from North
Cape to about Kaikoura or Greymouth in the south. Some l iterature suggests that the
rengarenga or rock lily was purposefully cultivated by Maori for the thick fleshy roots
which were roasted or steamed and then eaten (Riley, 1 994; Harris 1 996; Harris & Te
Whaiti , 1 996) . Their flavour has been l ikened to potatoes. Wild plants produce a mass of
matted roots whereas cultivated plants have been noted as having much larger roots .
Colenso ( 1 880 : 30) wrote :
(This plant [rengarengaJ grows to a very large size in suitable soil, and when
cultivated in gardens. From this circumstance, and from not unfrequently noticed it
about old deserted residences and cultivations, J am inclined to believe that it was
also cultivated. '
1 09
The rengarenga was a significant food resource to some Maori communities and also had
considerable utility in both medicinal and spiritual ways.
6.:8.2 IPfiha (sometimes given as IPUilwftna)/Ra1lllIt"ikftlIPollrOIt"1llla -Sonchus slPlP.
ndudling Embergeria grandifolia; Cftnatftnam :HsllalIlldis sow tftnistlle
Essentially not a cultivated crop by early Maori, puha (sow thistle) is making a renaissance
in the New Zealand diet and is now being cultivated purposefully for the market . Gourley
( 1 996) in her publication on vegetables written for the [then] industry body VegFed (NZ
Vegetable & Potato Growers Federation) included pUha as a green vegetable used in the
same way as spinach and wrote :
' . . . it [pUha] was one of the staple green vegetables of the Miiori . . . the 'smooth '
leaved puhii being the most popular. The slightly bitter and 'prickly J leaved puhii is
also eaten. Whilst it is not grown commercially it is occasionally available and
there is certainly demand for it in some areas. '
Aside from the Chatham Island sow thistle which is endemic to the island (McKenzie &
Johnston, 2004), there are several varieties of Sonchus spp . considered native to New
Zealand and the Kermadec Islands; Sonchus oleraceus (sow thistle, puha pororua, rauriki),
Sonchus asper (prickly sow thistle, pUha tiotio, taweke/tawheke, rauroroa), Sonchus
arvensis (perennial sow thistle) Sonchus Kirkii Hamlin (shore sow thistle; ex S. littoralis)
although their origin and existence in New Zealand is mostly conjecture (Kirk, 1 894;
Cheeseman, 1 923 ; Best, 1 977; Sykes, 1 977). Microfossil evidence from research on an
historic Maori Pa site known as Kohika in the Bay of Plenty has identified one of the puha
varieties as a pre-European component of the Maori diet. Horrocks (2004: 326) identified
fmdings of:
' . . . very high proportions of pollen of Sonchus kirkii (puhii) and Typha australis
(raupo) indicating that these taxa were part of the diet of the local people in
prehistoric times (AD 1 700-1 750). '
Leach (2005) suggests that at least one of the puha varieties [Sonchus asper] was probably
introduced to the New Zealand environment by Maori during their migratory period.
Shawcross ( 1 967) includes pUha as one of the green vegetables occasionally eaten by Bay
of Islands Maori in early times. While primarily used as a vegetable, pUha juice also
contributed to the diet as a form of tonic and some people note the raw sap could be rolled
1 1 0
into a ball and used as a chewing gum known as pia or ngau (Papakura, 1 938) and a
beneficial product for teeth and gum health . The sap was sometimes mixed with the gum
of the tarata plant (Pittosporum eugenioides) for a similar use as a chewing gum (Tregear,
1 904) . Pl1ha was only ever used as a fresh green vegetable, especially in spring and early
summer and provided a relish for meals, primarily fish.
Puha is a wild vegetable which grows prolifically throughout New Zealand and off-shore
islands . It is considered as an indigenous vegetable or food by most and is now under
scrutiny as a potential commercial crop option. Colenso (quoted in Leach & Stowe, 2005)
listed puha generically as Sonchus spp . and as one of the most important of the New
Zealand endemic plant foods .
An interesting note on the discovery of puha by soldiers the Maori Battalion during the
Second World War attests to the value of the plant to the Maori diet and also to other
cultures . The following extract is from the Te Ao Hou publication in 1 954 (P62) and is also
mentioned in Cody ( 1 956) :
'It was Colo.Yl.e! Bertrand, who as l\.lajor Bertrand, 2 lie 28th (Maori) Battalion,
made the discovery that the Maoris were not the only people who recognised the
merits of pt/ha. The New Zealand Division had landed in Greece and 5th Brigade
transport was proceeding by road to its position near Olympus. During a halt for
lunch it was observed that the farmers were very busy weeding their crops and
Major Bertrand strolled over to get a closer view. The workers were not weeding
but gathering piiha, which they said was a much prized vegetable with them. Very
soon, at the rate of a shilling a sugar bag, they were gathering piiha for the Maori
transport drivers.
Piiha, sonchus oleraceus to the botanist and sow thistle to everybody else, is such a
typical New Zealand plant that it is generally thought to be native to this country. It
was first noted scientifically by Ernst Dieffenbach, who came here in the Tory as
surgeon and naturalist to the New Zealand Company. As early as 1843 he
mentioned that the Maori people used it freely as a green vegetable. It is not,
however, a native plant for it is common in Europe and may have come to New .
Zealand as a stowaway in the canoes of the great migration. A t least that is what Dr
H. H. A lien, of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, thinks
possible. ' (Anon, 1 954:62)
I I I
6. 13 Haria I Paeal Nlkol Pukal Reareal Nanil Pora -Brassica oleracea
(wild cabbage, Maori cabbage)
An introduced plant, the haria was said to be introduced at the time of fIrst contact from
Europeans in the 1 8th Century. It was grown as a green vegetable and used in much the
same way as for pilha. The Maori cabbage is now found as a cultivation escape which has
become a generic weed species throughout New Zealand and is also common on coastal
cliffs (Roy et al. , 1 998) . Beattie ( 1 949) noted para or wild cabbage as a diet staple and
sign of past settlement in South-Westland in the few clearings where it can be found there,
often alongside patches of pilha.
6.14 Poroporo - Solanum aviculare
Poroporo (also p6poro) is a wild plant sometimes planted around kainga or villages as a
' kai tamarikf59 . Essentially the children were given the ripe berries - known as Hareto or
H6reto - as a food supplement. The berries are slightly toxic and unpalatable when green
but edible when ripe. Early European colonists made jam from the fruits (Cheeseman,
1 923) . The mature leaves of the poroporo were also used for flavouring in hangi and
layered on the hot stones before the uncooked food was put down. The soot of the plant
after fIring was also used as a component in tattooing pigment. Sometimes the plant
Solanum nigrum or 'black nightshade is also referred to as poroporo and used in the same
way as pilha. In Taranaki (more so than any other district) it is a favoured green vegetable
used in preference to other wild green vegetable plants in daily meals and for hui6o.
6.15 Harakeke - Phormium tenax (New Zealand lowland or swamp flax)
Wharariki - Phornzium cookianum (NZ coastal or mountain flax) [ex : P. colensoll
Me he wai korari Like the nectar of flax
New Zealand swamp flax or harakeke is an evergreen perennial plant grown throughout the
country, often as features in landscaping or windbreaks or native plantings. It is not related
to the European (l inum) flax which has been cultivated s ince Babylonian days, but was
given the flax name because of the similarity in uses. New Zealand flax species are
59 'Kai tamariki ' - literal ly 'children' s food' .
60 Nga kaumatualkuia 0 Taranaki whanui .
1 1 2
general ly hardy and tolerate most soil types and climate including medium to heavy frosts.
As an added bonus, the flowers of harakeke are well-known for their sweet nectar used as a
food sweetener and also renown for attracting feeding birds in the spring. It is also
believed that the endemic flax snails or pupuharakeke (Placostylus hongii) which lived
within the plant clumps provided an occasional food source for some northern Maori
(Hayward & Brook, 1 980; Brook & McArdle, 1 999).
An interesting observation concerning the korari or nectar of flax was made by McDonald
an early resident and historian of the Horowhenua region. He stated (O'Donnell, n.d. : 60) :
' Wai-korari is a sweet synlpy fluid, which fills the large reddish-brown flowers of
the flax stalks, and was sucked out of the flower by the Maoris and also gathered in
calabashes and brought home to the pa for more leisurely use. A curious thing
about the flower of the flax is the state of the tide can be told from them with
considerable exactitude. 1 will not guarantee that this holds good everywhere, but
on the coastal country 1 can vouch for the correctness of the statement from
personal observation. At low tide the flower is empty, and as the tide comes in, so
the wai-korari gradually rises in the flower, until at high tide it is full to the brim,
and at spring tide actually flows over in a steady drip. As the tide goes out, the wai
korari recedes until the flower is dry again, and so on twice a day while the flowers
are in full bloom. '
Harakeke was understood to be the most important uti lity plant to Maori society after their
food plants . It was recorded that when Maori were informed that flax did not grow in
England, some chiefs are reported to have asked, "How is it possible to l ive there without
it?" (Hindmarsh, 1 999) . There are a considerable number of known varieties of flax in
New Zealand and Maori are known to have selected and grown flax for their particular
qualities especially strength, softness, durability, colour and quantity of fibre (Scheele &
Walls, 1 994) . (Refer to Appendix 6 for a list of vernacular names.)
New Zealand flax is one of four natural fibres used by Maori in their weaving: the other
three being pingao (Desmoschoenus spiralis) , tii (Cordyline australis) , and kiekie
(Freycinetia banksii) (Best, 1 898 ; Bergin & Herbert, 1 998) . All four plants were managed
in-situ for their contribution to traditional society. Wharariki or coastal flax was not so
commonly used in Maori society as its leaves were relatively soft and droopy by
companson. Nevertheless it remains a plant of considerable interest to Maori society and
1 1 3
has a lot of common factors with harakeke. Buck ( 1 923) identified several other plants that
provided leaf material suited to weaving including paopao (Scirpus lacustris) ,
kowharawhara (Astelia spp.), karetu (Hierochloe redo lens) , lacebark (Hoheria populnea),
maurea (Carex spp .) and nIkau palm (Rhopalostylis sapida) .
Flax plantations, known as pii harakeke (pu harakeke for a s ingle plant/clump), were
propagated from root division off parent plants and planted near every settlement and in
forest areas where it didn ' t grow naturally (Best, 1 977) for harvesting and use in making
clothing, sandals , belts, fishing nets, sails, baskets, fly swats, matting and cordage among
other items. Beattie ( 1 949) wrote how flax was used to make drinking cups :
' The Miioris were very adroit at making drinking cups from flax and would twist up
a watertight cup in surprisingly quick time. One of my friends said they use the rito
(young leaves) of the flax . . . this ingenious cup was called konenewai. '
McNab ( 1 908) quotes Ensign McRae in a statement made to a Commission of Enquiry in
England in May 1 82 1 regarding the newly discovered New Zealand. McRae said:
(They dig small trenches about a foot wide and nine inches deep and plant the flax
between the trenches. They generally select moist lands for the flax, and when they
wish to have it for a very long or any particular purpose they plant it on rich soil '
, [how was it propagated?} . . . always by plants. We were told by the natives that it
did not grow from seed '
Harakeke has recognised qualities ill fibre, variable between cultivars grown and the
intended utility of the fibre (Scheele & Walls, 1994) . Harakeke also has the distinctive
advantage of being a sought after product for rongoa Miiori or traditional medicines . All
parts of the plant have rongoa uses - often specific to tribal or family groups . Flax was an
important commodity crop in the early 1 9th century (McAllum, 2005) for purposes of trade
by Maori throughout the country and providing the base material for ropes, sacking,
upholstery and other fibre products (ibid ) . When the Europeans arrived with their range of
textile materials, the traditional use of flax suffered immensely as it could not compete with
the warmth of wool, versati lity of cotton, or the durabil ity of hide (Hindmarsh, 1 999) .
Convenience was also considered a factor as flax was relatively laborious to prepare
compared to the other textile materials . At this point in our history the woollen blanket
became a favourite garment for Maori .
1 14
The flax provided the basis for an industry that lingered until the 1 980s in parts of New
Zealand. In 1 873 there were 50 flax mills within 1 6km of Foxton (Esler, 1 978) and by
1 906 there were 240 flax mills throughout the country employing over 4000 people. The
5 800 hectare Makerua Swamp near Shannon supported 1 9 flax mills alone and over 700
workers in its heyday in 1 9 1 6- 1 7, producing 2500 tonnes of fibre from 22000 tonnes of leaf
annually (Hindmarsh, 1 999).
Harakeke is now making a comeback in New Zealand society, especially as a component of
the cultural renaissance and the base material for many traditional crafts and art-forms . A
national collection of 60 cultivars of harakeke is maintained by Manaaki Whenua Landcare
Research at their Lincoln campus, Canterbury.
6.16 Karaka - Corynocarpus laevigatus (Kopi [Chatham Islands))
The karaka is an evergreen tree found predominantly in coastal districts of the North Island,
the northern part of the South Island to Banks Peninsula, the Kermadec Islands, and the
Chatham Islands where it is known as kopi (Molloy, 1 990; Gilmour, 1 993 ; Leach & Stowe,
2005) . This tree was often planted in the vicinity of settlements and the trillt provIded an
addition to the subsistence food supply from the cultivations in the late summer and early
winter. The karaka is said to have also been introduced to Aotearoa during the period of
migration from Hawaiiki . Descendants of the Aotea waka claim karaka seeds were among
the freight of the Aotea and were planted in the vicinity of Patea on their arrival
(Hammond, 1 924). The seeds were believed to have been sourced en-route to Aotearoa,
probably from the Kermadec Islands (referred to as Rangitahuahua in Aotea tradition)
where the karaka is considered endemic and where tradition states the Aotea stopped
briefly (ibid.) . The descendants of the Tainui, Takitimu, Kurahaup6 and Nukutere waka
also claim to have brought the karaka to this country. There is also a school of thought that
the karaka was not introduced through the migration of Maori but was already establi shed
because it is a native plant of New Zealand (Molloy, 1 990). Hamilton ( 1 903) quotes the
notes of a Mr Shand in stating that the Moriori tradition believes the karaka was earlier
1 1 5
introduced to the Chatham Is lands by Maruroa and Kauanga who travelled in the waka
Rangimata from Hawaiiki and successfully planted the karaka seed at a number of sites.
There is reasonable evidence to show the karaka was purposefully planted in groves near
settlements and cultivated for its fruit which was an important food (Molloy, 1 990; Park,
1 995 ; Wilmshurst et al. , 2004)6 1 . Leach & Stowe (2005) conclude that 'on the Chatham
Islands, the absence of himara 'sweet potato ' meant that karaka might have assumed a
greater value than on the mainland. ' Aside from the belief the karaka was purposefully
introduced and planted on the Chatham Islands there is also the belief that some of the
quarrels among Moriori prior to the arrival of Maori centred on the possession of valuable
karaka trees as the fruit was the basis of a staple food (Hamilton, 1 903) .
The flesh of the fruit i s relatively palatable and eaten as a fruit when ripe. Colenso ( 1 880)
wrote that the karaka was 'of inestimable value to the Miiori as a common and useful
article of vegetable food, second only in place to their prized kiimara tuber ". It is the
kernel which is known as the kou or Maori peanut62 that is the well known product of
karaka consumed by Maori . The kernel of the fruit contains poisonous compounds however
and considerable processing through steaming and drying is required before they can be
eaten56.
6.17 AruhelRoi -Pteridium esculentuml P. aquilinum / Pteria acquiline/ (Fernroot)
Note: aruhe or roi is only the rhizome, not the whole plant which is known as raruhe
(Taranaki), rau-aruhe or rarauhe
Arguably one of the primary foods of early Maori, aruhe or fermoot no longer provides any
input to the diet of Maori or non-Maori alike. In pre-European times, aruhe was a staple
food providing the necessary starch and carbohydrate needs of Maori, especially where
kiim�ra could not be easily grown (Jones, 1 989) . There is consensus that when Maori
migrated to Aotearoa from the tropical Pacific, their previously reliable food crops which -
were cultivated and harvested year-round such as kiimara, yams, taro and breadfruit were
6 1 Also in, Nga Ruahine evidence relating to the Taranaki claim to the Waitangi Tribunal, 1 99 1 '
62 Personal communication, Mrs Hinehou Lincoln, pakeke 0 Ngati Porou, 1 996, and other informants
1 1 6
no longer to be rel ied on because of the temperate cl i lnate and ri sk of frosts on production.
As a consequence, aruhe became the most rel iable starch-based food which could be
sourced throughout the country. The greatest advantage attributed to femroot was that it
was an absolutely sure food supply for the many districts where i t grew prolifically
(Shawcross, 1 967) . The qua1 ity of the rhizome fluctuated somewhat depending on the
cl imatic conditions or soi l conditions, but nevertheless, i ts hardiness and rel iability ensured
survival of many Maori communities.
The following short waiata (song) quoted in Firth ( 1 972 :322) about the aruhe al ludes to the
value of this plant as a food for man throughout the generations :
He aha he kai ma taua?
He pipi, he aruhe.
Ko te aka 0 Tuwhenua
Ko te kai i ora ai te tangata.
Matoetoe ana le arero
Te mitikanga, mihe arero
Kuri au, au, au
What shall be the food for us two?
Some pipi and some fern root.
That root which spreads through the earth
Ah! Tis the food which revives man,
roughening his tongue
As he rolls it over in his mouth;
Rough it grows as the tongue of a dog, au, au, au.
Aruhe was considered a staple food by Maori and had a wide range of terms appl ied to the
plant as a whole or various plant parts (Best, 1 908 & 1 977) . Several varieties of fermoot
were also recognised by different tribes and there were also several names applied to the
processed and cooked product of the fermoot. The anlhe was essentially an uncultivated
crop and was considered the mainstay of vegetable foods for many if not all tribes
(Shawcross, 1 967). Papakura ( 1 93 8) however describes how she remembered her Te
Arawa people occupying cultivation grounds to plant and harvest aruhe. These grounds
were jealously guarded as were other crop cultivations. Whi le many people focus on
cultivation techn iques as the criteria for classifying horticultural production, Maori were
well known to manipulate the environment to encourage fresh aruhe production within
foraging distance. Primari ly this was achieved by burning the old fern and promoting new
growth and hence new rhizome growth as well . This can be considered a horticultural
approach through environmental management and one which assisted the provision of a
staple food throughout the year.
1 1 7
number of medicinal uses as wel l . It has been described as second only to harakeke in its
use as a uti lity plant by traditional Maori society (Toole, 2006).
6.20 Kokihi / Rengamutu - Tetragonia tetragonioides (NZ Spinach)
[ex. Tetragonia expansa (Cheeseman, 1 923)]
K6kihi is an indigenous plant found growing wild throughout the country, including the
Kermadec Islands (Sykes, 1 977); mostly in coastal areas with sandy soils and rocky debris
s lopes (Dawson & Lucas, 1 996) . Commonly called New Zealand spinach or perpetual
spinach (Lloyd, 1 950), it is not often seen in the gardens or on the dinner tables today yet it
was a popular vegetable with earl ier generations of Maori . Cook (Vietmeyer, 1 99 1 ) and de
Survil1e (Riley, 1 994) both utilised it as a substitute remedy for scurvy amongst their crews .
From seeds collected on Cooks expeditions, k6kihi is now grown as a vegetable in many
parts of the world. It is still grown by some elders around Taranaki65 and possibly other
tribal areas but it is not currently produced anywhere as a commercial crop66 . Early settlers
also used the leaves mixed with alum and soda to make a bright yellow dye (Lloyd, 1 950) .
An interesting note regarding k6kihi is that it is believed to be the only true vegetable that
any part of Australasia has provided . to . the world' s cuisine and yet it is relatively
unappreciated in New Zealand itself (Vietmeyer, 1 99 1 ) .
6.21 Para -Marattia salicina (King fern or horseshoe fern)
He aha to kai? He para to kai, ka taka nga hua 0 te whakairo.
What is your food? If para is your food the pattern of your tattoo will revolve
[the root of the para was such a delicacy that even the moko revolved in appreciation]
Also known as parareka (Taranaki tribes), para-tawhiti, uwhi-para or uhipara, this fern is
said to have occasionally been purposefully cultivated near kainga or villages in pre
European and colonial times (Cheeseman, 1 923 ; Best, 1 977) . Propagation was achieved by
splitting the rhizome into individual pieces which were then planted. In their evidence to
the Waitangi Tribunal in 1 99 1 , Nga Rauru KItahi of South Taranaki noted the rhizomes of
6S Personal communication, Mrs Ngungu Salinovich and Ngapera Teira, kuia 0 Ngati Rahiri - 1 997 & 2004,
and observations within Atiawa rohe. 66 NZ Spinach seed is now available at specialist nurseries for the home gardeners to grow this crop
1 20
para as a popular food in earl i er times67 . Park ( 1 995 : 1 2 1 ) quotes the 1 870s surveyor Edwin
Brooks as stating that 'para(tawhiti) was evidence of a place being long inhabited by the
natives ' . In North Taranaki it is remembered as requiring rich dmnp soils and being grown
in vegetable plots or gardens near their kainga right through to the 1 920s but the util itarian
uses are less well remembered as it was replaced as a food product by this time68 . In
Northland, important groves of para were managed in damp bush areas at Motatau,
Pukenui , Mimiwhangata, Whananaki, Matapouri , Russell, Mangamuka and Omahuta,
however they are now almost unknown because of dalnage from feral animals (Anon. ,
2006). The large starchy rhizome was cooked, preferably boiled, then pounded with a
pestle and eaten as a vegetable. This is a slow growing fern and takes up to 5 'years for the
roots to reach harvest maturity . For this reason it had considerable tapu applied to it and
was restricted to being managed by only selected people within the community (Riley,
1 994) to deter indiscriminate harvesting.
The para is said to have been brought to Aotearoa on the Aotea waka, hence the naIne para
tawhiti (from a distance) . The root is a horseshoe shape and considered a great delicacy,
hence the reason this fern was cultivated near vil lages. Some writers termed it the pre
European potato saying it tasted V(l:':"i01.�s l.y J ikp. truffles, potatoes or bananas. Buchanan
( 1 876) noted that the slow growth of this fern probably accounted for its 'disappearance ' in
local i ties where there was a high Maori population. A famous statement by Kahu of Te
Arawa led to the naming of the Kaipara Harbour: Katahi au ka kai i te para ki konei, me
hua te ingoa 0 te kainga nei ko Kaipara (Now that I have eaten para fern here, the name of
this place should be Kaipara) .
6.22 Pikopiko (sometimes referred to as pitau)
Fronds of the Mauku/Mouku - Asplenium bulbifenlm (hen & chickens fern);
Kiokio - Blechnum novae-zelandiae; Paretao/Panako - Asplenium oblongifolium (shining
spleenwort) ; Pakau - Pneumatopteris pennigera (gully fern); & Shield ferns (Polystichum
richardii & P. vestitum [Puniu]) (Chinnock, 1 999)
The pikopiko ferns, especially the mauku, had a range of uses in traditional Maori societY,
primarily spiritual, healing and uti l itarian such as woven cloaks and whariki (mats) (Ri ley,
67 Unpubl ished notes on traditional resources by Nga Rauru and presented at Nga Rauru Muru me te Raupatu
hearing, Ihupuku Marae, Waitotara. 14 October 1 99 1 .
68 Personal Communication, Mrs S Lawson, Kuia 6 Atiawa, Waitara; 1 989
1 2 1
1 994) . I t was the young, unopened fronds known as pikopiko or pitau that were used in a
culi nary way and which are now finding favour with chefs in New Zealand with it
commonly referred to as bush asparagus (Brownsley, 200 1 ) . In general terms pikopiko is
sourced from wi ld populations of the different ferns found in various habitats throughout
the country however, with the renewed interest from the food industry, the possibility of
managed production is being researched.
6.23 Mamaku lKorau - Cyathea medullaris (Black tree fern)
(includes; katote tree fern - Hemitelia smithii)
Generally the tallest fern in stands of native bush, the mamaku has several medicinal uses
and also the inner pith of the upper trunk is similar to sago and is used as a food product,
especial ly as a relish to aruhe or fernroot . The trunks of the tall tree ferns (including
mamaku, korau and ponga [C. dealbata]) were also used for construction of houses and
food stores by Maori (Brownsley, 200 1 ) . In the account of the introduction of kiimara to
the southern Ngati Mamoe region, the arrival of Rokoitua from Hawaiiki was welcomed by
offerings of the pith of the mamaku fern, ti i kouka and kiekie for a meal. He responded by
taking some dried kiimara from his waist belt , soaking them and giving it to his hosts to
taste . The people then built two canoes to return to Hawaiiki and obtain the new food
(Anderson, 1 998) .
Some early botanists noted mamaku as one of the staple plant foods of pre-European Maori
(Leach & Stowe, 2005) especial ly in the South Island (Barratt, 1 979). It was superseded as
a food by the potato and grain products introduced during European settlement of this
country. The unopened fronds or pitau were sometimes laid on the stones in a hangi to add
a distinctive flavour69. Papakura ( 1 93 8) wrote that the pitau was cut into slices and cooked
for a long period in a hangi and then threaded onto a flax string and dried for later
consumption. The fibrous cone at the base of the fern was also used as lining for hangi pits .
The key disadvantage to uti l ising mamaku was the slow rate of reproduction or '
regeneration which meant it could not be rel ied upon as a regular food source (Best, 1 977) .
69 Nga kaumatua 0 Te Atiawa ki Taranaki, personal comments made to author.
1 22
6.24 Nlkau - Rhopalosty/is sapida - (Miko [Chatham Islands])
Rhopalostylis is a genus of three species of palms native to the New Zealand, Norfolk,
Chatham and Raoul Islands . They are solitary plants with prominent inflated crown shafts
and obliquely erect fronds (lones, 1 994) which are self-propagating by seed. Rhopalostylis
cheesemanii or the Kermadec nIkau is endemic to Raoul and Kermadec Islands and R.
sapida endemic to the main islands of New Zealand and the Chathams, including Pitt Island
The nlkau is the southernmost naturally occurring palm in the world (lones, 1 994) and the
only true native pahn in the New Zealand landscape growing as far south as Banks
Peninsula and Greymouth (Davis, 1 96 1 ; Hunt 2003). It had a variety of uses in traditional
Maori society; thatching (Davis, 1 96 1 ) , weaving (e.g. mats, hats, baskets) (Buck, 1 924),
and leggings from the leaves ; containers and pots made from the outer portion of the trunk;
necklaces and adornments from the hard berries; rongoa or medicines ; and as a food
product (Riley, 1 994) . lones ( 1 994) also noted the seeds were occasionally used as bullets
when shot was scarce during the nineteenth century. The edible rito or heart leaves of the
nlkau palm produce a 'cabbage ' similar but larger than the one produced by the tii
(Cordyline spp .) . This heart was eaten either raw or cooked and known as Te korito by Te
Arawa tribes (Papakura, 1 93 8) . Unlike the tii, removal of the heart leaves kills the nlkau
(Best, 1 977) and Rudman ( 1 992) and Hunt (2003) both note that this gave rise to the term
'millionaire ' s salad' by early European settlers .
Plate 5 : Nlkau palm (Rhopalostylis sapida)
1 23
6.25 Other crops
A wide range of other native trees and shrubs were managed within the landscape of
traditional Maori for a variety of reasons . To early Maori, all plants contributed to the
health of the community whether through rongoa (medicines), foods, and practical uses
such as clothing or thatching, or as the repository of other wildlife with further diverse uses .
Some specific trees were revered for their spiritual association, utility as a repository for the
remains of the dead70 or l inks to earlier activities such as inter-tribal fighting and so on.
Certain kahikatea (Podocarpus dacrydioides) groves are recognised for their role in burial
rites (Park, 1 995) and various rata (Metrosideros robusta and others) and p6hutukawa
(Metrosideros excelsa) trees are retained and renowned for their role in traditional society
(Simpson, 2005) . A tapu p6hutukawa tree stands at Waikanae, used as a repository for
placentas of important births of the local iwi (ibid. ) . All these trees (and shrubs) were
managed in a horticultural sense within the traditional society to ensure their continued
survival and association to the community .
6.26 Crop migration
As the European influence grew in New Zealand during the early nineteenth century, the
movement of new crops and marketable produce also occurred. Te Rauparaha is credited
with the introduction of several crops to the Well ington region during the resettlement of
Ngati Toa from northern districts as described in the following statement by Ngati Toa
kaumatua Pateriki Rei to the Waitangi Tribunal in 1 994:
'After they settled in Kapiti, Whanganui-a-Tara. They set the people at different
locations. Te Rauparaha had a nice trade. He introduced the potato to the
Wellington province. A lso introduced kamokamo, corn to the Wellington province.
And he had miira [gardens] at Kapiti, at Otaki, at Miina, at Pukerua and at Wairau.
And he sold the produce in the ships. ' (Boast, 1 997 : 39)
70 As an example, the kahikatea trees of a wahi tapu known as Tauwhare in the Mokau River, North Taranaki
where, in pre-European times, the deceased were placed in the kiekie c lumps high in the trees to decompose
(as relayed by Ngati Tama Kaumatua) or a clump of pfuiri trees at Waimate North (Bay of Islands) also a
wahi tapu as they were used for the storage of human bones (Davis, 1 96 1 ) .
1 24
The speed and ease of which crops such as the potato spread and became distributed among
iwi is evident in the writings of many observers of New Zealand of that time.
Bell ingshausen observed in 1 820 that the original potatoes p lanted by Cook (ostensibly in
1 773) had spread considerably from their original plantation - with the assistance of local
communities (Barratt, 1 988) . Some Otago scholars bel ieve Ngai Tahu to have original ly
sourced potatoes from Queen Charlotte Sound in the 1 770s by a chief known as Koroko
(Anderson, 1 998) . Firth ( 1 972) noted that :
' . . . the results of the introduction of the potato bring out with clarity the manner in
which new culture items affected the economic life and even the environment of the
native [Maori] . '
Potatoes became invaluable to many Maori in their subsistence l ifestyle of the times. It is
well known that whalers and sealers released p igs and planted potatoes and some other
crops so that when they returned from their expeditions they would have a food source to
access, no matter how isolated the location. Mariners knew these plantations as ' food
depots ' (Raynal, 1 880). Maori were of the same behaviour and took the time on their
travels or seasonal movements to build shelters and p lant gardens in preparation of a later
return. Kehu was a well known guide from Ngati Tumatakokiri of the Nelson district and
accompanied Thomas Brunner, Charles Heaphy and William l' ox in tneir expiorations of
the South Island in the 1 840s (Host, 1 974) . Kehu frequently took the time to 'fashion
shelters, plant potatoes and make other preparations for a possible return in the district '
(Mitchell & Mitchell, 1 996 : 1 2) . These types of actions would have contributed to the
spread of European crops among Maori settlements of the time, and thus the introduction of
new foods and diet.
Some tribes were introduced to new 'European ' crops earlier than others . Papakura ( 1 938)
noted that while recognising the early introduction of potatoes by Cook and De Survil le in
the eighteenth century, Te Arawa of the Bay of Plenty district were not introduced to them
until early in the nineteenth century . She wrote:
' . . . it was many years before it [potatoes] was introduced for the first time to our
parts by Te Whatiu, a man ofTuhourangi, and by Te Whiu, a man ofNgati
Rangiwewehi at Puhinga. ' (pg 2 1 7)
1 25
Alongside this spread of crops was the introduction of economic activities such as the flour
mills, trading posts and vessels to tribal groups throughout the country. Horticulture was
undergoing a remarkable change in Maori society.
6.27 Chapter summary
The broad appl ication of Maori knowledge to horticulture activities including crop
production, p lant or resource management and/or manipulation and, allied disciplines is
evident in the number of crops managed for their uses and the resi lience of Maori to
economic influences since the time of European colonisation through adaptation . Evidence
has been provided as to the extensive knowledge appl ied by Maori in regard to horticulture
which complimented the ethnopedological knowledge held concerning the soils resource.
The traditional horticultural knowledge also has the distinction of being relatively
transferable between crops and sites because it has originated from experience in typical
New Zealand conditions over generations and has been refined as a result.
As with the knowledge al igned to the soils resource, that which is applied in horticulture
has suffered from the influences of colonisation and is retained by only a few within the
Maori community today. There are many proponents of aspects of this knowledge, but
general ly very few with the full gamut of Maori horticultural expertise which would have
existed in past generations. This knowledge can add considerable value to Maori in the
horticulture sector, both culturally and economically and this is a key reason to include it in
the process of land assessment where any decision on land-use activities is being applied.
1 26
Chapter 7: Decision systems
7.1 Introduction
Decision systems are a pertinent component of the techniques land and soil managers might
apply to their assessment processes in the management of resources. This chapter will
introduce both traditional Maori and contemporary decision systems used in the
horticultural and soil management areas . A single case study is also used to indicate how a
traditional Maori decision system would have been appl ied to a crop production system
which contributed to the subsistence of a community. The value of matauranga Maori or
Maori knowledge as a primary component of the system is also considered and discussed.
7.2 Systems approach
A system can be defined as :
'A group of interacting components, operating together for a common purpose,
capable of reacting as a whole to external stimuli: unaffected directly by its own
inputs and has a specified boundary. ' (Spedding, 1 98 8) .
In general terms the development of systems is undertaken to retain and retrieve a
knowledge set which people want to use periodically. Hard systems are relatively
inflexible approaches to this concept and can withstand external factors wel l . On the other
hand, soft systems are somewhat more flexible and also more responsive to external factors
and thus more representative of systems representing, among others, human factors .
The soft systems approach is based on fluid boundaries associated with an activity under
management and can generally be applied to the approach relevant to Maori knowledge and
its role in indigenous horticulture and soil management systems . To apply a systems
approach in a Maori context works towards acknowledging the holistic nature of Maori
systems and the relationship between individual components (sub-systems) that contribute
to these (supra)systems. Culture itself is sometimes considered as a system of shared
understandings held by a group of people with a continuing, but not necessarily static and
unchanging concept (Metge & Kinloch, 1 984) .
1 27
7.3 Traditional decision systems
Traditional (indigenous) systems for horticulture and land are varied and crop and site
specific. The experience of the people and their knowledge of both the intended crop and
resources avai lable to them impinge on the production system used. This section will look
at how traditional decision systems have evolved and give some examples of
implementation as tikanga practices. There are three main components to ethnoscience
which are transferable and will form the basis of this discussion; Kosmos or traditional
belief and perceptions systems, Corpus or traditional cognitive systems, and Praxis or
traditional management systems (Toledo, 1 992; WinklerPrins, 200 1 ) . In a Maori context
these can be applied as Te Ao Maori (The Maori worldlkosmos), matauranga (body of
knowledge/corpus) and tikanga (practices/praxis) (refer Figure 7 . 1 ) .
Figure 7. 1 : Visual depiction of traditional systems
TRIADIC ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS
Etlmo-science system (after Toledo, 1992) Proposed Mlitauranga Maori system
KOSMOS TE AO MAORI
CORPUS PRAXIS MATAURANGA TlKANGA
7. 3. 1 Kosmos
The relationship between a culture and their world view or belief system forms the very
backbone of that culture and its identity. World views, culture and social institutions
provide a template through which people perceive their opportunities and the threats facing
them (NZIER, 2003) . Maori, both urban and rural, are strong in the knowledge of their
whakapapa and the relationship it consolidates between them as a people and the resources
through which they traditionally survive. Their identity can be distinguished in part
1 28
through the value set which forms part of the cultural makeup of the people and their
behaviour as a whole.
Values
Every culture carries a set of values which defines and informs them and contributes to
their dai ly l iving. Cultures often judge each other on their unique set of values looking for
common ground or obvious departures from common understandings . There are
limitations as to how others might interpret values, seen and unseen. Maori values and
culture are often viewed by non-Maori under the preconception of what is expected of them
under the viewer culture and concepts . Dr Danny Keenan (quoted in Phil l ipson, 1 996: 1 1 )
notes that:
'Apart from the more obvious moral judgements [in early European observations of
Maori], there were also more subtle ones which underlay the use of words like
comfortable and uncomfortable, poor or rich, hygienic or unhygienic. These were
loaded terms involving culturally specific value judgements. '
Values and their identification to assist management processes are generally fraught with
problems of interpretation because of the subjective nature of personal knowledge applied
to thelf understanding. Increased attention is being given to the human dimensions in
natural resource management and conservation with the notion of 'values ' a means of
addressing socio-economic considerations and involving affected communities In
environmental decision making (Jackson, 2006).
Maori are probably more at ease describing their value set rather than defining them
(Harms worth, 1 995) such that they contribute to their identity and are derived from a
common belief system. The lack of written or recorded information about Maori values
can also affect their interpretation by the wider community. Thus when it is required to be
written for future use, it is often relatively simplistic. An example is the outcome of a
series of hui between a team focus sing on Auckland Regional Economic Development
(AREDS) and local iwi throughout 200 1 -2002 . Their final report presented a value set
determined through a series of hui in pictorial form as an analogy to a whare or meeting
house (refer to Appendix 7). The values were inclusive from whakapapa through to unity,
1 29
integrity and empowennent. The basis of the values was seen to be represented through the
three kete (baskets) of knowledge in Maori folklore (recognised as the origins of Maori
knowledge) :
1 . Te Kete Uruuru Matua Tuauri containing the philosophy of love, peace, goodness
and the study of humanity
2. Te Kete Uruuru Tau Aronui containing the knowledge of arts, war, agriculture,
building and carving, and
3 . Te Kete Uruuru Rangi Tuatea containing the knowledge of ritual, incantations,
intercession and tradition and which includes the history of the people.
These lead to Whiinau ora, taonga and miitauranga [health of the people, their treasures
and knowledge] which were effectively the three obj ectives the hui set themselves as
tangible outcomes based on these values (AREDS, 2002).
In 1 999, the Hauraki Maori Trust Board released a strategic plan to take them through to
the year 202 1 . Their model was based on a series of pou or traditional posts to hold up
their people and culture. These pou were based on a set of values identified as :
• Tapatahi, 'of like mind' - to ensure they have a sense of unity as an iwi
• Manaakitanga, ' Caring for' - caring for each other
• Ngakau Tapatahi, ' Integrity' - recognising individuals ' value with dignity and
respect
• Whakaute, 'Respect ' - acknowledging our rich and diverse backgrounds and skills
• Tohungatanga, 'Professionalism' - quality of service and standards to the wider
community
• Ngakau Whakapuke, ' Enthusiasm' - positive thinking, energy and approaches
This has then been built into an updated strategic p lan for 2006-20 1 2 which has diversified
to include values based on rangatiratanga (self detennination), kotahitanga (unity),
manaakitanga (hospitality), whanaungatanga (relationships) , kaitiakitanga (guardianship),
tikanga (cultural best practice), te taiao (the environment) , whenua (land) and titiro
whakamua (foresight) (HMTB, 2005) .
In their report on Maori economic development, the NZ Institute of Economic Research
(2003) identify the fol lowing traditional values as highly relevant to modem day Maori
society :
1 30
• iwitanga - an expression of identity and col lecti vism
• Whanaungatanga - kinship
• Whakakotahitanga - respect for individual differences, consensus, unity and solidarity
• Tau utuutu - giving back or replacing what you receive, reciproc ity
• Taonga tuku iho - recognising and holding onto treasures including knowledge
• Kaitiakitanga - stewardship or guardianship of the environment (NZIER, 2003 :44)
7. 3. 2 Corpus
This component of the approach to ethnopedology and traditional horticulture is primari ly
the ' local ' or indigenous knowledge formed in relation to the soil resource and the cropping
or horticulture activities reliant on the resource. In Maori terms this is the knowledge
which exists about the soils resource and which contributes to the management of the
resource itself and the body of knowledge associated with the horticul tural expertise
al igned to the culture. The corpus is inclusive of the nomenclature or classification systems
applied to the soils resource, the knowledge of relationships to the resources and the uses
applied to them, and the cultural assessments of quality such as presence or absence of key
vegetation. It is informed and based in the core values which are identified as part of the
kosmos and which are interpreted with some variation by iwi, hapu, whanau and
individuals. The variation is accepted as part of the natural variation you would expect to
see within a cultural group .
7. 3. 3 Praxis
Praxis refers to the practical implementation of the corpus of knowledge held within the
community . This application of knowledge is highly variable for Maori, especially as the
physical resources relied upon to produce their crops are extremely variable between
regions, localities, iwi and hapu groups . Maori define this specific knowledge and its
appl ication as ' tikanga' and acknowledge the variations which might exist between them.
Examples of praxis activities will also be found in related actions such as creating
admixtures for the soil e .g. organic amendments or external factors such as social occasions
or behaviours dictating the level of implementation to be appl ied.
1 3 1
7.4 The application of tikanga in traditional horticultural management
Prior to European contact, Maori had no beasts of burden, no metal tools or implements and
no exposure to other cultures. And yet, they had perpetuated [primarily tropical] crops
which did not naturally grow in temperate regions, e .g . , kUmara and taro . Yen ( 1 990)
identified that in general the New Zealand environment is marginal for any tropical crop
adaptation at its subtropical north. Farther south the seasonal nature of the climate dictates
the cropping systems applied to production. The Canterbury region, specifically Kaiapoi,
Banks Peninsula and Waihora or Lake Ellesmere were considered the most southern places
that kUmara could be grown, and even then with some reservation about how successful the
crops might be (Taylor, 1 958 ; Davies et aI. , 1 994; Bassett et al. , 2004) .
Maori lived in permanent settlements and their cultivations were distributed around a
district claimed by the residents. They practiced a form of rotational land use, generally
used only woodash as fertiliser and were understood to have cropped for no more than three
annual seasons on a piece of land. Food storage was as important as the production of the
crop itself. Without knowledge of storage they were likely to despair for good nutrition
during winter months. The whole production system was based on the annual seasons with
planting in spring, crop husbandry in summer through to harvest in late autumn. The
winter was always a period of rest for both the people and the land resource.
Some important agricultural practices developed and used by Maori during the crop
production phase include:
• Improvement of soil through:
o appl ication of wood-ash/plant material or charcoal as a soil amendment
o placement of stones around crops to increase soil temperatures by improving
heat retention
o addition of sand or gravel to improve soil structure by "lightening" heavy clay
soils
• Crop rotation
• Controlled burning of fern lands to control overcrowding and encourage VIgorous
regrowth and therefore edible fern-root production '
• Pest control (e.g. caterpillars) through fumigation by burning kauri gum or dried
kawakawa (Macropiper excelsum) or manual destruction of the pests
1 32
• Crop storage mechanisms (both storage houses above ground and insulated storage pits
below ground)
• Sophisticated processes were developed to transform poisonous or otherwise inedible
plants in order to make them edible (e.g. tutu [Coriaria arborea] j uice had to be
strained through fmely woven bags in order to separate i t from the highly toxic seeds
and stems) .
Table 7 . 1 introduces some of the key tasks on the horticultural calendar for pre-European
Maori . This table should be read in conj unction with the maramataka Maori or traditional
calendar which was an important factor in the determination of the timing or appl ication of
tasks . The tasks are elaborated on in the following discussion on tikanga and management
activities in Maori horticulture and also in the taewa case study (Chapter 7, pgs 1 39- 1 44) .
Table 7 . 1 : Calendar of events in traditional Maori society for horticulture activities.
Drawn from information in Shawcross ( 1 967), Firth ( 1 972 :72) & various tribal informants
SEASON MONTH TASKS -
. .
NOTES,
..
Hotoke; Pipiri Occasionally the breaking of new ground, Matariki (New Year) .
Takurua June generally too cold for any key tasks. Occasional harvest of
Winter pikopiko through winter.
Hongongoi Coldest month, some clearing might be
July undertaken for new cultivations
Hereturi-koka Burning off gro�:r:cl. ::::': tl.:P-li!::g :oil In Rise ofPuanga (Rigel)
August readiness for planting
Mahuru; Mahuru Continue c learing for new crops, flax Time for Tii harvests
K6anga September p lanting - fernroot digging (next 3 months) Planting of pa harakeke
Spring Whiringa-a-nuku Planting of majori ty of crops. Harvest of
October Tii (cabbage tree) roots for processing
Whiringa-a-rangi General management of crops
November
Raumati Hakihea Second Tii harvest, crop management and Occasional harvest of
Summer December occas ional late planting. End of fernroot young hue.
harvest.
Kohi-tatea Harvest of forest foodslberries, firing of Harvest of raupo pol len
January dried fel led trees on new cultivation ground (pua) begins. Early
Fencing and crop management harvest of karaka berries
Hui-tanguru Weeding of crops, storehouses prepared for Main taewa harvest
Febntary harvests. Harvest some early kumara for underway and storage
process ing into kao (dried kiimara) begun
Ngahlrru; Poutu-te-rangi Main harvests, especially root crops & hue P laiting of kumara
Te kohi- March prepared for storage and festivities baskets and first harvest.
6-Autahi Paenga-whawha Cropping tasks now complete, c lean up
Autumn April t ime. Karaka kernels harvested
Haratua Crops are put into storage. Time to harvest Time of relaxation,
May seaweeds for curing. Al l stores are in and socialising &
preserving completed before Hotoke . . entertainment
1 33
7. 4. 1 Seasonal approach
Crops are planted and grown according to their natural season and the calendar of events i s
well known prior to any activity taking place. To support this Maori utilise the maramataka
or Maori calendar which is based on indigenous knowledge of astronomy, cosmology and
the seasons, effectively ' indigenous lunar science' and substantiated by observation of the
environment. Other tohu or signs are util ised in determining horticultural activities e .g . , the
arrival of the shining cuckoo and its shril l call koia, koia, koia (dig!, dig!, dig!) in spring i s
seen as the calling of man to work the tilling of the ground for crops (Firth, 1 972), similarly
the arrival of the star Poutu-te-rangi or flowering of certain trees or shrubs such as the
kowhai also s ignify the arrival of spring and the start of a new planting season 7 1 . These
tohu or signs would differ between regions, iwi and hapu.
7. 4.2 Labour
All levels of society, including chiefs (Firth, 1 972) participated in vanous activities
associated with gardening or production of food. Labour was understood to have a social
contribution and value (ibid.) and many whakatauaki or proverbs recognise this point. Each
person had tasks assigned to them as suited to their rank. Tohunga for example, were
responsible for the karakia and well being of the tribe through the spiritual presence over
the crop. Mokai or slaves had the arduous tasks; young women graded the harvest (so as
not to physically exert themselves if their childbearing years were yet to come) 72 and the
young men performed the more physical tasks such as p lanting and mounding. Labour
fluctuated by seasons as various members of the community were taken away for other
activities such as fishing or war. Pere ( 1 982) states that:
( . . . labouring on the land, planting and harvesting crops, were regarded as a prized
accomplishment not to meet a commercial market, but of itself. Rangatira did not
lose any prestige by performing menial and manual tasks. ' (p22)
7. 4. 3 Seed selection
Based on experience, the tikanga associated with seed selection for crops is based on .
keeping the best for p lanting (regeneration) so that the traits held within the seed are
71 Personal communication, Hemi Cunningham (kaumatua 0 Ngati Hauiti), December 2005, and others
72 Personal Communcation, Mrs V M Adlam, Kuia 0 Ngati Rahiri, 2000
1 34
transferred between generations. This was metaphori cally aligned to the process of
whakapapa within tribal communities and strongly adhered to as it ultimately contributed to
the survival of the people. Spoilt or undesirable crop material was eaten straight away or at
least stored temporari ly for use before the next season .
In contrast to the accepted practice of keeping the best produce for seed, it was noted by
Clark ( 1 949) that potato seed supplied by Maori from the Wellington region to N gai Tahu
in the south noticeably deteriorated in quality during the early 1 840 ' s . Clark hints that the
inverse process of keeping only the smal l and non-marketable tubers for seed might have
contributed to this s ituation and new seed was then sourced from England & New South
Wales . This imported seed was noted as yielding one-third to two-thirds more than the
locally sourced seed (Clark, 1 949) . Of course, other factors such as virus within old seed
stock or environmental inputs may have contributed to the poor yields alluded to .
7. 4. 4 Crop production
This is a varied and highly ordered process . From the initiation of the production system
through karakia and association with key atua and people through to the day to day
activities which kept the crop growing and targeting fruition. Production systems are based.
on tikanga specific to those undertaking the tasks. Different groups within the community
would have different tasks. Specific tools and implements were used for specific jobs.
Planting any crop was a major activity in Maori society and the following statement on
kiimara planting at Maketu prior to 1 9 1 4 gives insight to the activity a century ago;
, . . . [planting] itself was quite a ceremony and planting time was usually November,
or when the weather signs were favourable to the young plants. When a marangai
[mist] came in from the sea, and the sun was obscured and the air damp with the
sea mist, was the most propitious time to plant .
. . . . . . it has been said by those who remember kfimara planting ceremonies in
Maketu prior to 1914 that the singing in the early morning, the rise and fall of the
chanting as the planters worked in unison, was almost ethereal as it rose on the
mist-laden air. All work was done on a cooperative basis, each plantation being
visited in rotation, while individual owners, or gro�ps of owners, prOVided the
meals for the working teams in turn. At the end of planting one big feast for
everybody, followed by dancing and singing, rounded off the ceremony. ,
(TapseU, 1 947)
1 35
The gardens were known for their meticulous appearance and fastidious workers . Aspects
of production would jnclude pest and disease control , weed management, nutrition and
fencing to keep out animals. It should be noted that the majority of the pest and disease
pathogens seen today were not present in pre-European Maori society and hence no
traditional management approach exists for many of the current plant health issues
surrounding the traditional crops . Tregear ( 1 904) made some interesting notes on pest and
disease management in a traditional kiimara production system. He wrote :
'The larv(£ [of the anuhe caterpillars or Cordiceps robertsii] were carefully picked
off into baskets, carried away and burnt,· it was a job always greatly disliked. This
part of the work, fetching the gravel, weeding, watching for the caterpillars, etc. ,
was faithfully and carefully performed by the women. Sometimes, however, old men
past other work would be set, as the crop grew towards ripeness, to scare away
thievish rats by working rattles at night, these rattles being composed of lines on
which mussel shells were strung in bunches, that jingled and made a sound
sufficient to scare away the rodents. '
Most plants now considered weeds in New Zealand cropping systems were not present in
early Maori society. The problem plants were likely to be shrubby plants such as manuka
(Leptospermum scoparium) or tauhinu (Ozothamnus leptophyllus) however with long
rotation periods and short cultivation seasons, weeds did not appear to be a major problem
to these early systems (Leach, 2005) .
7. 4. 5 Harvest
Again an activity which was based on tikanga and involved the whole community with
each person having their own task. As mentioned, young women did not carry heavy loads
so would be involved in grading the produce with their older relatives. The harvest activity
was supported by tohunga and karakia and chants throughout the process and undertaken
based on the maramataka or traditional calendar.
7. 4. 6 Storage
Another process that required ski l l and was based on tikanga specific to each tribe; the
reliance of stored produce to maintain the community through the winter months or during
periods of drought, or war highlights the importance of this activity . The traditional rua or
1 36
storage pit was considered to be the most successful method of storage of root crops
(excluding taro corms) (Berridge, 1 9 1 3) based on excluding any moisture from the storage
environment and the maintenance of a moderate and even temperature (Walsh, 1 974) .
With the introduction of feral animals such as p igs, Maori adapted their storage faci lities
for crops such as potatoes and kUmara. The timanga was an elevated platform, 2-3 metres
high with sides that enclosed the platform but no cover. The enclosure was l ined with fern
and the crop stored within it (Beckett, 1 953) . Pataka and whata are other well known raised
structures used as storehouses. General ly enclosed and often permanent structures, pataka
were often elaborately carved and used for long term storage of preserved and dried foods
not suited to rua and also sometimes for tools, implements and garments (Best, 1 974) .
Subterranean storage pits or rua kflmara are the most obvious remnant of early Maori
horticulture evident today. Their presence is regarded as evidence of both gardening
practice and settlement in many old pa sites (lones, 1 989a; Furey 2006) . The number and
distribution of the pits also indicates the size of horticulture practices and crop volumes
handled by tribes . There are two types of rua: rectangular pits, generally accepted as being
for storage of kUmara73 and the bell shaped ones for fruits and other foods preserved in-situ.
Essentially rua were wholly or semi-subterranean and the sides were strengthened by the
use of tree fern trunks and then lined with rushes and the floor covered with dried manuka
and fern fronds . A roof (k6pani) was placed over the rua after the kUmara or other produce
was put inside (generally stacked loose) and often soil was then placed over the roof.
Primary storage methods included:
• Whakatoke or simple p its for shorter-term storage of a lesser quantity of kUmara or
other root produce;
• Timanga which are essentially open tiers on raised platforms to protect from browsing
animals;
• Whata - similar to timanga;
• Piitaka or raised storehouses on legs at least one metre above ground level and sealed
against rats and other pests.
73 Note : seed and eating kiimara were divided at harvest and stored in separate rua.
1 37
The choice of storage option was primarily aligned to local conditions. Colenso ( 1 880) and
Best ( 1 974) both noted that all storehouses were rigidly tapu (sacred) as were the few
persons al lowed to visit them for any reason.
7. 4. 7 Preserving
Preserving food products was a common practice to extend the storage life of the food.
Examples of traditionally preserved foods are :
• Smoked fruits of forest trees - stored in a rua and ' smoked' by burning brush wood
such as manuka and sealing the rua before the burning process was complete.
• Foods fermented in running water such as with kanga and taewa.
• Dried and cooked foods such as kUmara kao (steamed and dried) .
• Foods preserved in hinu or animal (bird or fish) fat (huahua) .
There were many other preparation and processing methods appl ied to food products in
traditional times. Some of these methods continue to be used in the present day as a
specifically Maori process and some are re-gaining favour as potential commercial
opportunities in New Zealand and abroad.
7. 4. 8 Trading
It was common in traditional times for tribes to participate in a system of exchange known
as hoko or ohaoha. The exchange was generally of commodity products allowing both
parties to partake of each others food products and thus break their monotonous diet. The
term given to the act of receipt of these food products was whakaeanga (Graham, 1 948) .
Table 7 . 1 introduced some key activities undertaken with horticulture crops in traditional
Maori society. In a contemporary perspective, these traditional actions have an added value
in that they can be used as a key contributor to an international market looking for
indigenous crops produced using indigenous systems . This economic opportunity alone
adds a considerably wider value for Maori horticulture and for the knowledge that makes it
unIque.
1 3 8
7.5 Case study - Sample Crop; taewa
Note : this information has been collated from interaction with Maori representing iwi from
Te Tai Tokerau through to Murihiku (Northland to Southland; the breadth of New Zealand)
over at least the last 20 years and more recently biannually through the national Maori
vegetable growers ' col lective - Tahuri Whenua Incorporated Society. The information has
not necessarily been published but general aspects can be found in relation to Maori
horticulture in a few publications of note and referenced in chapters three, five and six as
appropriate.
Taewa are also known as riwai, parareka, peruperu or Maori potato and are a cultivated
crop introduced by early contacts with Maori at least as early as the eighteenth century .
They are grown annually during the summer months and stored for use in the winter or off
season. Their importance ranked with kUmara as a staple part of the Maori diet. The
advantage of taewa over kUmara was that they could be grown in colder climates and were
easier to establish as they grew from tubers rather than shoots . As a late introduction to the
Maori production system taewa were not subject to the same level of tapu as kUmara and
proved to be much more reliable in production . In recent years there has been a strong
demand tor commerciaily produced taewa for the hospital ity market in New Zealand and
increasingly for the general consumer market as wel l .
Traditional (prior to the colonisation period - 1 840 onwards) production of taewa followed
some generic tikanga applied to most crops of the time. The following points highlight the
key factors associated with taewa production during the early period of colonisation :
7. 5. 1 Participants
As with all crops tohunga or seers said the karakia over different activities during the crop
production and made the decisions when to plant and harvest the crops. Whatever the
tohunga did guaranteed a successful crop. The rangatira or chiefs decided where the crop's
would be planted and which whanau or family group would look after which plot or crop.
The rangatira would often participate in the p lanting of crops, as it was an important
process, but leave the rest of the production work to the different workers .
1 39
The young men of the com unity would do all the hard physical work such as turning over
the earth and cultivating the ground ready for planting. The whole area for the garden was
cleared ahead of planting but general ly only the part to actually be mounded and planted
was dug over. Women looked after the grading of seed ready for planting as well as the
grading the crop post-harvest ready for storage. Lastly, slaves, if any, were used to do the
weed and pest control and they were not given any responsibility to fulfil with the crop
which required mana or status.
7. 5. 2 Rituals
A number of rituals were applied to the production of taewa. These were targeted at Rongo
(also known as Rongo-maraeroa) the god of cultivated food and considered very important.
Rongo would look after the crop and ensure a good yield and the survival of the tribe. The
rituals included:
• Placing (or burying) mauri stones, sometimes known as taumata, which represented the
god(s), around the planted area.
• The first part of the crop planted in a special area, next to one of.,the stones, the mauri
would look after this crop and in turn the produce would be offered back to Rongo.
• The tohunga would cook and participate in the first of the crop (harvested from the
specially planted area) as they were the direct channels to the gods.
• In North Taranaki Rakeiora was acknowledged as their local god ofkUmara - and later of
taewa. Mauri stones representing him were placed among the crop74.
• Te Arawa acknowledge Matuatonga as a kUmara god (and of cultivated root crops)
brought on the Arawa waka and buried on Mokoia Island (Papakura, 1 93 8) .
7. 5. 3 Pre-cultivation
Site selection criteria for the crop were based on the knowledge of the region including soil
variances, micro-climates, historical land use and nuances. Early crops were usually
planted on north facing s lopes to catch the morning sun. In Te Urewera, Bay of Plenty,
they planted in l ight bush for frost protection (Best, 1 976). Main season crops were planted
74 Nga kaumatualkuia 0 Ngati Rahiri me Atiawa
1 40
in the flats and open ground. A crop was generally grown for no more than three years on
one site. Preparation then included clearing of vegetation at the crop site prior to winter,
burning any woody remains on the proposed site in spring and using the ash as a fertiliser; a
technique known as whakapara with the clearings were known as waerenga. Lastly,
turning the soil was undertaken so that any remaining vegetation decomposed naturally
prior to planting.
7. 5. 4 Cultivation
All cultivation and harvesting activities were undertaken in working parties known as ohu.
The first task was to break up the ground again after the first turnover and leave for a week
at least, break down a third and last time ready for planting The mounds were moulded into
rows then left until the tohunga and maramataka (calendar) indicated it was time to plant.
The tools used were kaheru, hoto & peka. These were fonns of spades while koko and
tikoko were fonns of the shovel and timo and timotimo were fonns of grubbers.
Planting was undertaken using the maramataka Maori calendar (refer to Appendix 1 ) .
Anything planted from Korekore-turoa through the Tangaroa period to Ao-tane (day 26)
will produce both good size and number of that crop . Days 25 and 26 (Tangaroa-a-kiokio
and Ao-tane) are the best days for the whole month for both p lanting and fishing. (Note :
these days and names are from the Atiawa version of the maramataka.)
7. 5. 5 Seed preparation
In traditional (pre-colonisation) practice, seed tuber preparation was undertaken by the
women and children of the tribe. They graded out seed straight after harvest, taking out any
imperfections so that other seed was not damaged during storage . Prior to planting seed
tubers were brought out of storage, placed under trees or in a shaded place so the skins
could harden and then sprout in the warm spring sun.
1 4 1
Plate 6 : Selection of taewa cultivars (Solanum tuberosum)
1 42
7. 5. 6 Planting days
In preparation for planting the eyes of the tubers that had sprouted were rubbed out leaving
only one sprout. The first ohu or work gang would mould the rows while another followed
and made a hole for the seed tuber. The next ohu would place the seed with the sprout
facing toward the rising sun and cover it with earth . During planting there was no food
eaten until the end of the day when the planting had finished (the planting process was tapu
(sacred) and food would have broken this).
7. 5. 7 Crop husbandry
Prilnarily the slaves would weed and manage the insect problems in the crop as well as re
lnould the rows. If no slaves were available then ohu were formed. People, often the old
people, would be sent to work in the crop and also to scare off the birds . In SOlne cases
seagulls were trained to eat the insects and caterpil lars . Similarly, the hand picking of
caterpil lars from crops was COlmnon practice and the pests were taken off site and
destroyed. The burning of dry kawakawa (Macropiper excelsum) in-between the rows was
used as a type of fUlnigationlpest control. In the northern districts, kauri gum was used to
silni lar effect. Essentially there was no irrIgation applied to the crop; early Maori bel ieved
that if a crop died through a lack of water then it was not supposed to grow. Unproductive
crops were known as piiweku or pilerzl and barren potato seed tubers were lmown as
puhina.
7. 5. 8 flarvest
The tohunga would decide when to harvest . Taewa were harvested in autumn, before the
grolmd got too wet but the later in the season the better. Al lowing the vegetation of the
taewa to dry right back before harvest was a common practice, this allowed for the tuber to
harden / Inature in the skin Inaking it more suitable for storage.
7. 5. 9 Storage methods
Only the best quality tubers for kept for storage. Storage of taewa was undertaken very
much on the same principles as for kilmara. The tubers needed to be completely dry before
1 43
they were stored otherwise there was risk of rot spreading through the store. Tubers that
were spoi lt (tauhere or puakiweu) , damaged or wet were either used straight away or
allowed to ferment in fresh water to be used as a form of flour.
The most common method of long-tenn store was the rua which is an underground pit,
l ined with fern to keep it dry . The rua is naturally cool and dark, both good for storing root
crops . Later when pigs becalne cOffilnonplace, timanga or raised platfonns in the bush
were used as stores for taewa. Taewa were packed into kete or woven kits which were tied
and then stacked in the store .
7.6 Contemporary decision support systems
Decision making in management has been identified as following a 1 0-step process (Table
7 .2) whereby the first seven steps work through the decision making stage leading to
implementation in the final steps including review and evaluation (Boehlj e & Eidman,
1 984) .
Table 7 .2 : I O-step decision process used in decision & management processes
Drawn from Boehlj e & Eidman, 1 984
Step Decision process
1 Formulation of goals & objectives
2 Problem recognition & definition
3 Collection of information
4 Specification of alternatives
5 Evaluation of technical feasibility
6 Financial evaluation
7 Choice of an alternative
8 Implementing decision
9 Bearing responsibility
10 Evaluating outcome
1 44
Haverkort & MacKerron (2004) in their introduction to the use of Decision Support
Systems (DSS) in potato production highlight the three types of decision to be Inade .
1 . Strategic decisions - the most strategic decision itself is the one Inade to produce the
crop in the first place. Other decisions such as the proposed location of the crops,
variety, projected yields and Inarkets are also strategic and the authors identifY the role
of experience in Inaking these deci sions.
2 . Tactical decisions - generally appl icable i n the year of production only and includes
decisions such as planting dates, rate and tilning of nutrient appl ications, crop health
systelns, response to soi l tests and so on.
3 . Operational decisions - those decisions Inade by the fanner once the crop i s p lanted.
These different decisions apply to any crops; annual or perennial, indoor or outdoor
MacKerron & HaverkOli (2004) .
The identification of different levels of decisions required and how they can be
incorporated into systems thinking has led to the developlnent of decision tools, prilnari ly
in the fonn of computer Inodels . The tilning and regularity of uti l ity for such models varies
widely and often they are not suitable for many landowners, �s'p�c ; ��.l l :r t�0�.P' without the
technological training or access to the l evel of technology required. Maori landowners are
as diverse as their locations and opportunities, and many would not be proficient or have
access to the techno logy aligned to some of the contemporary models . But also, these
models do not take into account the cultural factors which many Maori Inight apply to their
managelnent approaches.
WinldePrins ( 1 999) argues that:
, . . . scientists and local people jitnction in different realities, spatially and
temporally and that scientists may never really understand the rationale behind
indigenous decision systems because of this ' . She continues to argue that 'such
separate realities can and should inform each other because local knowledge is
flexible but place specific, whereas scientific knowledge is less flexible but can be
applied in many places. ' (P 1 56) .
The integration of indigenous soi l knowledge with soi l managelnent strategies and
ulti lnately horticultural land uses has been suggested for use in the Caribbean and Latin
1 45
America (Barrios et al. , 2002) with a methodological guide focussing on a COlnmon
language for local and technical knowledge. This strategy is based on identifying a set of
local indicators of soil quality (ISQ) related to permanent and ITIodifiable soil properties .
The critical levels for the retention of quality are identified and then developed into a soil
quality ITIonitoring system (SQMS). The SQMS is then applied as a quali ty diagnosis and
monitoring tool . If it is accepted by the landowners or community of interest it then
becomes part of the overall decision support system appl ied to the resource as a whole
(ibid). The emphasis l ies in the first step of identifying appropriate ISQ.
A localised strategy trialled within Bolivia for the lTIotivation and developlTIent of the
ITIostly passive farming comlTIunity there incorporates a combination of collaboration
between extension workers and farmers, and incorporation of the human dimension into
processes that contribute to a holistic framework of rural developlTIent activities (Kessler,
2007). Participatory research tools are acknowledged in their role towards achieving
change in any community but they are also recognised as having a top-down approach and
retention of control by the researchers . The hUITIan dimension they have identified looks to
recognise the diversity of the cOlruTIunity frOITI gender and status to the individual
experiences each person brings to any proj ect. In this strategy they identified that voluntary
participation was preferred but remained a challenge overall . Raising awareness and
achieving motivation for people to participate is important but is recognised as taking tilTIe
to accomplish. Once achieved, they believe any strategy can be implemented with better
COITImUnity acceptance and timelier outcomes .
Oudwater & Martin (2003) researched the methodology and issues aligned to exploring the
local knowledge of soils within indigenous communities and looked to develop an
integration domain for the indigenous and scientific knowledge through Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) . Key issues arose through epistemological differences aligned
to each lmowledge source and also to the potential misunderstandings and ITIisconceptions
an uncritical approach to indigenous knowledge can create. Applying the GIS tool
involved a range of participatory inputs including interviews, mapping exercises, transect
walks and group discussion; all of which drew confidence within the community .
1 46
7.7 Soil and resource assessment models
There are a large number of asseSSlnent tools avai lable for land owners the world over to
assist in decision making regarding a change in land-use or horticultural activities . Many
are focussed on land inventory attributes such as crop determinants e .g . berryfnlit crops, or
resource evaluation to determine viabi l i ty c lassifications. Some are focussed on spatial
distribution of soi ls and soil properties through soil surveys . Very few asseSSlnent tools
exist at this time which incorporate a cultural index or value systeln, however SOlne have
been identified in regard to resource Inanagement and they will be considered for this thesis
in conjunction with the other Inodels .
Crop-weather Inodels were corrunon in the 1 950- 1 990 period and often the clilnatic
infonnation used was described in a form of notation, for example, where Y=f(x l , X2, X3,
. . . . x,J Here Y is the output in its prefen-ed form e.g. yields or growth rate for a crop which
is a function (t) of a series of climatic factors (X I to xn) . In this case the Inodels were
assulned to ilnply a relationship between effect and cause and could also be used for
statistical descriptions of the systems (McPherson et al. , 1 979). The inputs and outputs of
these models were based on functional relationships identified in four groups :
1 . truth tables where crops will succeed if all input requirements are Inet, tall
otherwise
2 . additive factors where each additional factor i s cOlnbined additively and applied to
the success-fail approach
3 . Inultipl icative factors where each additional factor is cOlnbined Inultiplicatively and
applied to the success-fail approach, and
4. lilniting factor relationships are identified and applied. (ibid. )
Quantifying soil quality factors has evolved from the notational approach to intricate
Inatrices whereby scienti sts apply quantifiable Ineasures and weightings to a range of
variables and then evaluate theln through statistical processes, prilnari ly exploratory and
con-elation analysis to provide a check for nonnality and the analysis of variance which is
standard statistical practice (Gobin et al. , 2000). This approach has its place in a purely
scientific environment however it ignores the context of indigenous or local knowledge and
147
would be biased towards western understanding if it were to be used to justify solely
cultural determinants.
The DSIR discussion paper ' Land Alone Endures ' (Mol loy, 1 980) looked toward wise land
use in regard to a nUlnber of options from urban housing to horticulture and forestry. The
social and spiritual values of Maori toward land were briefly Inentioned including the
option of non-use as a legitimate and wise use of land in some instances. Horticultural
land-use is described as a logical evolutionary endpoint of land development on rich ferti le
lowland soils; however crop selection is only introduced frmn a Inarket approach rather
than from resource suitability (Hewett, 1 980) . Si lnilarly, a manual published by the
Taranaki United Council (TUC, 1 985) focused on identifying crops with economic
potential and then looked at matching them to suitable resources in the Taranaki region.
Other key points identified included planning and Inanagement skills. Shepherd ( 1 99 1 )
took a silnilar approach i n matching crops to soils or vice versa in considering econmnic
use of arable land in the Manawatu-Wanganui region.
Webb & Wilson ( 1 994) produced a report that identified a classification systeln suited to
identifying land for orcharding. Quantifying climatic factors to assess risk to perennial
cropping systems is an i lnportant component of the process. Their system used a Inatrix
whereby a set of technological factors related to soil and climate were identified, Ineasured
and the results reviewed to determine the viabil ity of the land resource for an orcharding
option. They state :
' . . . while the classification is designed to provide a semi-quantitative, objective
method for extrapolating results of crop production gained from scientific
investigations and land use experience gained from o rchardists, an element of
subjectivity results from insufficient knowledge to determine the exact ef ects that
different land qualities have on crop growth and crop quality. ' (P 1 3)
This approach followed an earl ier report by Wilson & Giltrap ( 1 984) which introduced the
technological classifications to achieve reproducabil ity, precision and direct relevance for
users (P6) but had (or has) lilnited application in the field because of technical constraints,
language and accessibility to the reports by land managers .
1 48
Other specific reports also look to soil properties for specific horticultural uses . A recent
CSIRO report on identifying categories of viticulture soi ls within Australia (Mascrunedt et
al. , 2002) focused on viticultural ly ilnportant (and mostly visual) diagnostic features
including; changes in wetness (waterlogging), consistency, colour, structure, calcareousness
within soi l layers, and texture contrasts within the soil profile. Their descriptors are based
on morphological features of the soil such as colour, presence of ground water table, texture
and segregations of soi l materials e .g . , gravels . Their assessment approach was termed
'bifurcating' or based on the presence or absence of each particular key property within a
set of groupings and sub-groupings. A workbook was provided with colour plates to assist
landowners in applying the approach.
Shepherd (2000) produced a series of visual asseSSlnent guides for soil quality factors on
varying landfolms in New Zealand; hill country, sloping, and flat to roll ing country.
Essent ially thi s approach was prepared for landowners, as laymen in technological terms, to
be able to visual ly assess and score a range of quality factors such as soil structure, colour,
texture, Inoisture levels, erosion, t i l lage pans and earthworm counts. These assessments
were then scored subjectively and a ranking applied as detennined for cropping needs
(Shepherd et al. , 2000). Shepherd introduced the guides as a process for identifying the
relationships between land use and soil characteristics and assisting land managers in their
roles. Both soil and p lant indicators are assessed and knowledge of previous land-use or
paddock history assists the [mal interpretation. Furthennore, the technique becomes
another ski l l for managers to access in their decision processes (Shepherd & Park, 2003) .
The inclusion of Maori values in any resource assessment is Inore apparent in
environmental management approaches than in horticulture or agriculture systems. Within
New Zealand there has been an increased awareness of the role of Maori in resource
managelnent through the Resource Managelnent Act ( 1 99 1 and amendlnents) , the Fisheries
Act 1 996 and Kailnoana Customary Fishing Regulations, 1 998 . Through legislation the
relationship Maori have with the l and and sea resources is introduced to society in a formal
process and Maori are s lowly encapsulating their role in the Inanagement of these resources
because of this.
1 49
An example of a Maori centred approach to recognising and expressing Maori values in
relation to streams and waterways has been collated by Tipa & Tiemey (2003) and released
as a Ministry for the Environment report for public perusal and use. In their guide the
authors identify three key components to the approach they term as a ' Cultural Health
Index (CID) ' . These are; identifying cultural values, determining cultural health indicators
and, applying the index for implelnentation . They acknowledge the two distinct knowledge
bases (science and Maori) combined to create the managelnent tool, recognising the final
outcOlne of the CHI would not exist without both bases. The development of the tool
confirmed the valuable resources each cOlmnunity can add to this type of manageInent and
ultimately, the capacity bui lding it gives to the Maori community in their role as kaitiaki or
guardians of the resource.
In the development of the CHI, the authors identified at least four cultural values central to
the development of the tool and of the Maori relationship with fresh water. These were:
1 . Inauri, a signature of the health of the resource itself,
2 . mahinga kai, the abi lity to access the resource for food gathering,
3 . kaitiakitanga, protecting the interest o f future generations, and
4. ki tai ki uta, the philosophy of the water resource being an entity ' froIn the
Inountains to the sea'
This value set is transferable to the land resource as the relationship between the culture
and different physical resources is based in the same cultural paradigm. Furthermore, Tipa
& Tiemey identify the need to understand and appreciate the ' cultural landscape' the
resource exists within and the relationship of Maori to the resource. This can be elucidated
through whakapapa (genealogical descent) , pakiwaitara (stories), waiata (songs), prose and
other forms of knowledge sharing.
7.8 Education needs
For any assessment process to gain acceptance by the stakeholders, an education process is
required. The ethnopedology and soil science disciplines recognise the need to target both
the assessment process and education needs for the landowners and other parties to be
involved in the process (Barrios et al. , 2002 ; Karlen et al. , 2003) . As many of the scientists
1 50
who work in the field with indigenous knowledge of soils or horticulture have stated, there
is a need to look for the integration of indigenous and science knowledge systeIns and this
requires an education process frOln both knowledge sets.
The need for policy, both national and international , that informs soil and resource
Inanagement systeITIS, to respond to the envirorunent as a whole is very pertinent for the 2 1 st
century . Benbrook ( 1 99 1 ) wrote that natural resources policy will lnove to recognise and
respond to the interconnectedness of the resource base and the complex ways all our
manageInent inputs interact . The 'Laws of Nature' he added 'cannot be amended and
should not be ignored in evaluating and refining policy '. Other resource Inanagers
sOlTIetimes refer to this interconnectedness as the ' ecosystem concept' or ' utility by
soi lscape' i .e . management practices matching soil and landscape characteristics (Pierce &
Lal, 1 99 1 ) . These approaches all lead to an acknowledgelnent of a holistic body of
lmowledge relevant to soils lmowledge.
An interdiscipl inary approach to soils knowledge recognIses the holistic nature of
indigenous Imowledge and the more regulated approach taken by scientists . Local soils
knowledge is inclusIve of a range of social sciences through the relationship between the
community and resource. It also includes the worldview of the community, handed down
through the generations and providing the basis for their commonality and practices.
I Inplelnentation of local knowledge will also include some science practices, however,
based on ecology, biology and other disciplines applicable to the Inanagement of resources .
Education can be achieved at a range of levels from informal processes within the
community or fatnily group to structured tertiary education at polytechnics or universities.
In-between lie a myriad of education and skill development opportunities including
interactive or participatory processes between the comn1unity or landowners and
technological experts, consultants, field workers, advisors, researchers or other like-minded
cOlnmunities . The conduit or mechanisITI for learning is equally diverse including
structured learning - group or one-on-one, field days, internet processes, books, and
technologies such as CD' s or DVD's .
1 5 1
7.9 Chapter summary
Maori knowledge or matauranga can be viewed from a systelns perspective In a
contemporary approach to managelnent of land and crops . A systems approach aligns well
to the holistic interpretation of traditional knowledge and helps define the knowledge in a
form that is easily understood by both its informants and applicants.
In a purely cultural (Maori) sense, traditional decision systelns have existed for Inillennia.
They are founded in the very basis of the culture, in the world view which is often
expressed as Te Ao Maori. This foundation is then refined to matauranga specifically valid
to resources and management situations and applied through processes such as tikanga.
In trying to relate this systelnatic approach to matauranga Maori and soils and horticulture
management, a triadic approach frequently applied by ethnopedological experts has been
considered and Inanipulated to meet the expectations of Maori working with their
cOlmnunities and resources . Essentially the triad is based on a kosmos/corpus/praxis model
which can be applied as a Te Ao Maori/matauranga/tikanga model by Maori. This triad
has the abi lity to be easi ly applied in contemporary situations and can also respond to
changes in land or resource assessment criteria which Inight be applied in different ways
through individual and group variations .
In reviewing the range of decision tools and assessment criteria currently applied to land
assessment and horticulture, it is apparent that nothing exists that takes any account of
cultural factors which align to the land or people as owners and potential Inanagers of the
land. The body of traditional Maori knowledge aligned to soils and horticulture i s
extensive and has the potential to contribute in a very positive way to the economic utility
of Maori land, especially that which is not currently in any form of productive use. One
Inethod to encourage landowners into better economic utili ty and also greater acceptance by
the horticulture sector will be an assessment tool which incorporates all these factors and
which will be addressed in the following chapters .
1 52
Chap er 8: Case Study Report
8.1 Introduction
The case study approach to this research will contribute to the process of justifying the role
of cultural tools in soils assessment and horticulture for Maori land owners . The case
studies were undertaken with three distinct entities representative of Maori land interests in
the 2 1 sl century. The evolution of Maori land ownership and management since the
inception of the Maori Land Court in the Inid nineteenth century has created a unique suite
of land ownership structures for Maori frmn incorporations through to various trusts and
individual ownership. Regardless of the ownership stnlctures as defined in the court
system (which is a non-Maori context) , the cmnmon factor for all Maori land interests
relnalns with the whakapapa and connectedness that exists between both the land and
owners . This whakapapa elelnent cannot be taken away and will always contribute to the
relationship between the resource and the people.
Three case studies were undertaken based on the following terms of reference detennined
in discussion with kaurnatua at the instigation of this thesis :
An historical association to the land was apparent
• Group identities were based on kaupapa Maori terms
Land/activities identified which came under the jurisdiction of the group, and
Past developlnents and/or interests in horticulture were apparent
The case studies purposefully target a mix of Maori land ownership structures which in turn
represent the type of land interests many within the Maori cmnmunity hold. The structures
are variably :
an incorporation responsible for a portfolio of land and other resource interests,
e a whanau block al igned to hapu and marae activities which has been succeeded to
generationally but which now represents absentee owners, and
1 53
• a national Maori entity formed by a group of landowners with a conunon interest in the
economic use of Maori land through horticulture. Land ownership structures held by
group Inembers range from Inarae reservations to trusts and individual blocks.
Each case study looks at the history of the land under study, the unique cultural factors
aligned to the land or owner group and the abi li ty to apply a cultural layer to the asseSSlnent
of the land for the potential change of land use to commercial production of taewa -
inclusive of cultural management inputs. The case studies are intended to provide
commentary and discussion on these factors and wil l contribute to the final developlnent of
a land assessment tool suited to Ma.ori land development. In the context of this thesis, the
cases studies can be viewed as a trial application of pertinent cOlnponents of such a too l .
An information gathering process relative to managelnent processes and horticulture was
undertaken in support of each case study. Infonnation was sourced from written sources
and from cOlnmunity (predominantly Maori) and industry informants. The physical, capital
and econolnic resources al igned to each study such as soil and climate needed to be fully
identified in order to support the nature of the study. An awareness of the time constraints
to achieving a full return to horticultural production by any group is acknowledged.
Each case study concludes with a SWOT analysis to review the Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities and Threats as they Inight apply to the assessment process and any potential
horticultural land use. The SWOT is a standard managelnent systelns tool and has a
practical role in the case study as it wil l surrunarise the key points relevant to the overal l
project. A SWOT analysis is also a way of analysing an organisation ' s or group' s internal
and external environments; the SW component considers those factors comprising the
inside of a system and the OT considers those that would be outside of the systeln or
externalities (Inkson & Kolb, 1 998) .
1 54
8.2 Case study 1 : Wakatu Incorporation 75
P iki mai ra, kake Inai ra. Ki nga mana, ki nga waka, ki nga hau e wha. Nau Inai , haere
Inai , haere Inai . E aku rangatira . Mauria Inai nga aroha. Mauria mai nga Inate 0 ia lnarae,
o ia Inarae, kia tangi hia, kia mihi hia. No reira, e nga Inate, haere, haere, haere. E te iwi,
ka koa te ngakau. N ga taonga 0 tatau tupuna, nga whenua 0 Wakatu kua hoki mai ki te iwi
Maori . No rei ra, ka nui te Inihi , tena koutou, tena koutou, tena koutou katoa. (Excerpt
frOln the mihimihi g iven by the inaugural chairman of Wakatu Incorporation, Mr Pirihana
Te Hineurangi (Kahu) K.otua at the official establ ishment hui held at Nelson, 1 9 DeceInber
1 977).
8. 2. 1 History - te toto
This case study focuses on whenua in the Motueka district, west of the general Wakatu
settlement in the Nelson district. Early occupation of the Motueka district is credi ted to
SOlne obscure tribes including N ga Rapuwai who are bel ieved to have originated froln
Taranaki as descendants of the brothers Pananehu and Tarnaki, original occupiers of North
Taranaki alongside another brother Taitawaro who did not migrate south (Waru, ND).
Waitaha may have also occupied the area in earlier centuries and ancient gardens believed
to originate from either N ga Rapuwai or Waitaha occupation have been IdentItled In
various locations in Te Tau Ihu - the top of the South Island (Mitchell & Mitchell, 2004) .
Fol lowing the lnigration period of Maori from Hawaiiki , the area had associations with
various tribal groupings including Ngati Mamoe, Ngai Tahu, Ngati Wairangi, Ngati
TUInatak6kiri, Ngai Tara Pounamu and lastly, Ngati Apa and Ngati K.uia. In the early part
of the nineteenth century, some of the Taranaki and Tainui tribes extended their influences
to the South Island and by the time of the Treaty of Waitangi they were the dominant
residents of the Wakatu region. It is the descendants of these tribes: Ngati Rarua, Ngati
Koata, Ngati TaIna and Te Atiawa who form the nucleus of owners of the incorporation
now known as Wakatu.
75 Wakatu Incorporation & Ngiifahi Horticulture (WWw. wakatuhort. org)
1 55
In 1842, NZ Company representative Samuel Stephens landed at Motueka to assist with the
surveying in that district. He noted extensive cultivations in the area known as Te Matu or
the B ig Wood from a point lmown as Te Kumara near the Motueka River Inouth to several
ki lometres upstream (Mitchell & Mitchell, 2004 : 306) . In his words . . . the natives have a
large potato clearing at this wood where they grow annually some hundreds of tons of
potatoes . . . (ibid) . Phillipson ( 1 995) noted that archival records indicate Pakeha witnesses
gave evidence in 1 844 that Maori residents in the Motueka district specified to the NZ
Company representatives that settlers were not to interfere with their cultivations and that
the whole of the 'B ig Wood' was to relnain exclusively in Maori hands. Evidence collected
by the Waitangi Tribunal for its Northern South Island reports states that Stephens told
Motueka Maori they would have ' tenths ' in addition to their cropping land in the Big
Wood but this area (the Big Wood) was later included and divided among the settler and
tenths al lotlnents (Phillipson, 1 995) .
The tenths system of land allotment to Maori was the brainchi ld of Edward Gibbon
Wakefield of the New Zealand Company, the earl iest settlelnent company to establ ish
themselves in AotearoalNew Zealand. The New Zealand Company ' s colonisation policy
included reserving a portion of territory from land sales equivalent to one-tenth of the
whole as an inalienable estate in an attempt to improve the social and material conditions of
the indigenous population (Phillipson, 1 995) . These reserves would be scattered arnong the
settler allotments on a random basis . The inspiration was drawn from the example used
with American Indians whose isolated reserves did not encourage cOlnmunity participation.
These reserves from the New Zealand COlnpany therefore were meant to ' civil ise ' Maori
through 'participation in new ways of l ife and all the social amenities of the new
community (ibid. ) . As a consequence of redefmition by the cOlnpany these tenths were in
fact an eleventh (one block for every ten) , not one-tenth, of the land purchased by the
company (Phillipson, 1 995 & 1 996).
Alongside the tenths reserves, occupational reserves were created as a result of the 1 842-45
Commissioner Spain hearings into NZ Company purchases. It had become clear that Maori
were not expected to actually live on their tenths reserves ; they were seen as beneficiaries
1 56
but without consideration given as to where they were supposed to actually live and sustain
themselves (Mitchell & Mitchell, 2004) . Thus the occupational reserves were created and
Maori were to live and utilise them as needed. S ixteen ' tenths ' sections covering 800 acres
[364ha] in total at Motueka, Inostly in Te Matu or the Big Wood, were redesignated as
occupational reserves for resident families l iving in Motueka. This in itself created
additional grievances for the wider iwi interests and the NZ COlnpany alike who were
unhappy with the process and outcomes (ibid.) .
The first economic census of Maori in the region in 1 886 showed there were just 96 Maori
l iving in the Tasman Bay (NelsonlMotueka) region, subsisting on 4 1 Yz acres [ 1 8 .5ha] of
potatoes and 8914 acres [40ha] of other crops . They also had 50 acres [22ha] in sown grass,
400 sheep, 1 1 4 cattle and 1 07 pigs (Phillipson, 1 996) .
8.2. 2 Establishing the Incorporation
The Wakatu Incorporation was established by a government order in council under Part IV
of the Maori Affairs Atnendment Act 1 967 on 4 August 1 977, to administrate around 1400
hectares of Maori reserved lands (to be known as the Corpus Lands 76) . These lands were
then valued at around $ l l mill ion and previously known as the "Nelson Tenths' and
Motueka and Mohua (Golden Bay) occupational reserves located around Nelson and
Motueka (Jones, 1 998) . These reserved lands all originated from the NZ Company policy
of a tenths estate applied to the Motueka district in the 1 840s .
Prior to 1 977 the land had been administered on behalf of its owners by a succession of
Crown-appointed Boards, Commissioners and Trustees. From the 1 880s this land was
subject to perpetual lease . The ownership and [perpetual] leasing arrangements for these
blocks were originally established by over 40 pieces of legislation dating back to the 1 850s.
The terms and conditions of the leases were consolidated in the Maori Reserved Land Act
1 955 which provided for perpetual leases on renewable 2 1 year terms, fixed rent over the
2 1 year period and rent fixed at 5% of the unimproved value for rural lands (Te Puni
K6kiri, 1 997) under the control of the Maori Trustee .
76 Personal communication, Ropata Taylor, CEO Wakatu Inc . 8 June 2004.
1 57
Subsequent government enquiries found the leases unjust but no action was taken unti l a
Royal Commission of Inquiry report of 1 975 created the impetus from which Wakatu was
born (Te Puni K6kiri, 2003) . With the passing of the Maori Reserved Lands Act in 1 997,
Wakatu Incorporation initiated the transition from perpetual leases managed under
legislatively provided conditions to normal renewable leases on market rentals with
commercial conditions (Te Puni K6kiri , 1 997) .
The land vested in Wakatu Incorporation is held in trust for the owners . In 1 977 there were
1 ,668 owners, descendants of the original owners, all of Ngati Ralua, Ngati Koata, Ngati
Tama and [Te] Atiawa 77 iwi, who received shares in Wakatu Incorporation, and are now
known as shareholders who receive dividends and not rents. The lands which Wakatu
Incorporation administers now also include land investments purchased since 1 977 .
Plate 7 : Motueka district and Wakatu orchards - looking eastward towards Nelson
(Photo courtesy of Wakatu Inc . 2004)
77 - - -Known variously as Atiawa, Te Atiawa & [Te] Atiawa nui tonu - these terms are often used
in terchangeab I y
1 5 8
8. 2. 3 Wakatu in the 21st Century
Wakatu Incorporation is a large private cOlnpany governed by a board drawn from the
shareholders. The organisation maintains a head office in Nelson and also Inaintains section
groups comprised of subsidiary cOlnpanies and joint ventures . The Wakatu board focuses
on governance and section managers focus on Inanagelnent (Te Puni K6kiri, 2003) .
Wakatu Incorporation has become very successful in a number of ventures, including
horticulture, dairy production, forestry and fisheries. Their portfolio is divided into four
arms; primary, property, seafood and tourisln78 . The incorporation now manages over $200
million (Wakatu, 2006) of assets and is looking to diversify into land and sea Inanagelnent
alongside global marketing (Jones, 1 998) .
The incorporation has evolved through strategic planning from a simple land ownIng
company to an international marketing company. The Wakatu group of companies identify
their core purpose as being to create wealth for its owners through developing a diversified
asset base, while also upholding the tikanga of the owners and is export focused Inarketing
all its products internationally (Te Puni K ..6kiri, 2003) .
Their horticulture initiatives cover over 85 hectares (pipfruit, kiwifruit, taInari llos) as well
as a packhouse and coolstores, and produce is sold nationally and internationally to
supermarket chains in the United Kingdoln & France. They employ a number of staff and
offer a cadetship prograInme to train youth in horticulture which has proven very
successful. The incorporation owns over 1 000 hectares of dairy fanns (4 fanns) in the
South Island which are Inanaged under a joint venture arrangement. Forestry is based in
Marlborough and Parapara (Golden Bay) and covers 1 33 5ha and is well into a si lviculture
prograIrune with the first harvest due to begin around 20 1 5 . Fisheries investments include
crayfish processing in a joint venture with Port Nicholson Fisheries, paua processing based
on fishing quota and aquaculture projects for shellfish and wetfish. In 2006 the board
detennined to develop a technology platfonn to aInalgamate their business systems,
streamlining Inanagement and adding value overall to the incorporation (Wakatu, 2006).
78 Personal Communication, R6pata Taylor, CEO, Wakatu Inc. 8 June 2004
1 59
In 2005 , Wakattl ' s horticulture arm joined with Ngati Rarua Atiawa Iwi Trust in Motueka
to form Ngatahi Horticulture - a cOlnbined i nit iative to participate in the ever-changing
horticulture industry (Brown, pers . COIn . June 2004).
The Board of Wakatu tries to Inaintain a balance between cOlTIlnercial and t ikanga Maori
skills . Commercial skills involve understanding business and its analytical requirements,
sound judgment and decision-making. Their CEO explained that it has not always been
easy finding people with the required commercial ski l ls, but it has been eas ier to find
people with skills in tikanga Maori (Te Puni K6kiri, 2003) .
The Board's overall performance is assessed using bottOln l ine indicators such as absolute
profit, return on funds from each asset group and net funds growth. The shareholders can
assess the boards ' perfonnance by thei r own measures, cultural or otherwise, and determine
the dividend at the twice yearly shareholders meetings. The cOlnpany benchmarks its
performance against silnilar organisations, but also has independent goals to raise fmancial
returns over a five-year programme (Te Puni K6kiri , 2003) .
Wakatu Inc . carries out extensive business risk analysis including the exchange rate,
economic risk, climate and other environmental factors. The Incorporat ion uses industry
analysis and internal analysis to create core strategies for each business ann. This is a
formal p lanning cycle which involves reviewing and evaluating the previous year' s
operations, preparing forward business plans and preparing budgets . This process begins in
February and runs unt i l August, and is very important as it dictates where Wakatu wi ll
allocate funds.
Management has a Inonthly reporting responsibi l i ty at board meetings. In addition to this
process, at least one member of the Wakatu board is on the subsidiary company board. This
ensures clear communication and flow of infonnation between the Wakatu board and its
subsidiaries .
Key issues for Wakatu identified in thei r recent annual reports (2003-6) and by thei r CEO
in 2003 (Te Puni K6kiri, 2003 : 34) include:
1 60
•
meeting lnarket demands, especially for their horticulture arm
an end to the perpetual lease regime that currently exists over many Wakatu lands
progression on granting water for aquaculture initiatives
more influence over the Reserve Bank to ensure the currency does not fluctuate .
training programmes established for young people wanting entry in the horticulture
industry.
govemlnent invest more in research, development and training
The CEO states his belief in a successful Maori organisation giving its people mana. He
believes the business must uphold the owners ' tikanga and create and distribute wealth
(ibid. ) .
Plate 8 : Te Tau Ihu indicating Wakatu district. (Photo courtesy ofWakatu Inc . 2004)
1 6 1
8. 2. 4 Cultural evaluation
Kosmos
Four distinct iwi form the nucleus of shareholders and relationships to the land which is
Wakatu Incorporation: [Te] Atiawa, Ngati Rarua, Ngati Tama, Ngati Koata. Only [Te]
Atiawa are considered with regard to the individual values applicable to Motueka and
'Robbies block' (the focus of this case study) as they hold the mana whenua79 for this
district.
Te Atiawa whakapapa to Taranaki maunga. The followingpepeha8o identifies Te Atiawa:
Ko Taranaki te maunga tapu
Ko Tokomaru te waka
Ko Waitara te awa
Ko Atiawa, Ngati Mutunga, Ngati Maru me Ngati Tama-ariki a Te Atiawa Nui
Tonu ki Taranaki, Te Ikaroa a Maui te wharenui 6 enei iwi
Ko Owae whaitara te Inarae-a-iwi
The movements and migrations of Atiawa alongside Te Rauparaha of Ngati Toa during the
early nineteenth century saw them settle in several distinct locations south of Taranaki
including Waikanae, Te Whanganui-a-Tara (Well ington central), Waikawa (Picton),
Arapawa Island and Motueka mostly displacing earlier inhabitants by conquest. By the
1 830s Te Atiawa were ensconced in Te Tau Ihu or the Northern South Island but they
always retained their relationship with their family and relatives in Taranaki and often
journeyed between the two districts for family reasons (Phillipson, 1 995; Roskruge, 1 999;
Mitchell & Mitchell, 2004) .
The whakapapa of Te Atiawa, sourced in their descent from Tamarau te heketanga-a-Rangi
aligns them to the celestial realm and origins of Maori . From this they draw their
worldview, flfStly in its relationship to their primceval origin and secondly to the influences
of the environment and social factors which have moulded the traditions of the tribe .
79 Mana whenua; l iterally translated as 'status over the land' or, the primary cultural relationship to the land.
80 Pepeha; in this context, a proverb or exclamation.
1 62
COil" us
Values applied to the Wakatu Corpus Lands vary according to the relationship of the people
to the specific reserves created were politically rather then culturally defmed. Phil l ipson
( 1 996) suggests the owners of these particular Maori reserves were looking to the Crown to
fulfil their promises to give them Crown grants for individual interests on land in the region
however; they were not necessarily looking to stop their communal farming practices . In
2007 it is apparent there are two equally valid value sets aligned to Wakatu lands ; the
collective incorporation and, individuals ' representative of whanau, hapu and iwi
relationships to specific land b locks . Each set is evolving as their relationship with the
whenua changes over time .
Plate 9 : Wakatu marae, Nelson
Collective Wakatu Incorporation values set
The collective values appl ied by Wakatu in regard to their business activities and land
interests are dynamic and evolutionary. The 1 994 Strategic Plan for Wakatu Inc. included
the fol lowing extracts regarding the overall mission of the incorporations ' business, their
' values or philosophy' , social responsibi l ity (people, administrative and financial) and
investment strategy (note there is no Maori translation aligned to the 1 994 statements) :
Mission Statement: A business of the land - he taonga tuku iho . Striving for profit,
social and cultural growth through leadership, professionalism, honesty and
diligence (p2)
1 63
Values or philosophy : In all our business activity, decisions will be taken only after
consideration of their impact on our people [shareholders], on our environment and
on our assets as well as our business. This consideration will encompass the
principles of guardianship, leadership, management and challenge.
In our actions we are guided by the values of knowledge, welfare and relationship.
It is our belief that these principles and values are fully compatible with the
objectives of ef icient, profitable business. (P2)
People policy : Recognising and providing for the obvious stakeholders: the
beneficial owners of the incorporation Ithe shareholders, the owners ' descendants
and, the employees of Wakatu, also including consideration of the less obvious
stakeholders including customers, suppliers, business partners and the local
community. (P3)
Table 8 . 1 : Vision and values identified by Wakatu Inc.- 2006
Vision: Titiro whakamuri kia mohio ai koe te huarahi kei mua i a koe
You know not your future until you know your past;
Our dream has a purpose and our dream has a history.
Values: Our organisation reflects our values in everything we do, those values are:
Manaaki whenua, manaaki tangata, haere whakamua
Kaitiaki Care for the land, care for the people, go forward
We are the guardian of our assets and community
He tangata la tahi
Integrity A person who speaks once (a person of their word)
We are honest fair and trustworthy
Tama tu, tama ora, tama moe, tama mate
Commitment He who stands lives, he who sleeps dies.
We are focussed on achieving our goals
He aha he mea nui 0 te ao? he tangata, he tangata, he tangata!
Manaaki What is most important in the world? It is people, people, people !
We respect, nurture and support one another
He manga wai koia kia kore e whitikia
Innovation It is a big river indeed that can' t be crossed
We are adaptable and creative
Kanohi ki te kanohi
Communication Face to face
We are open and transparent
Kia mau koe ki ngii kupu 0 ou tupuna
Tikanga Hold fast to the words of your ancestors
We embrace our traditional values and beliefs
Waiho i te toipoto, kaua i te toiroa
Whanaungatanga Let us keep close together, not far apart
We are a family business and value our relationships
1 64
In the 2006 preamble to the Wakatu half-yearly Ineeting (June), the incorporation identified
a vision and values set (Table 8 . 1 ) to its shareholders (quoted verbatim) :
Praxis
Tikanga me taha Miiori ki Wakatu - FoMA model
Wakatu Inc. is a IneInber of the Federation of Maori Authorities (FoMA)8 1 who are a Maori
business entity representing Maori interests at a national level in a nrunber of fora. They
have produced a set of objectives which they believe meets their Inembers ' needs and by
virtue of their meInbership, Wakatu also acknowledge these objectives in their core
business.
FoMA objectives are designed to advance the following roles played by all Maori
organisations82 . They are :
• Kaitiaki - Guardian of the taonga: protect taonga, develop taonga;
• Kaiwhakahaere - Representative of the beneficial owners : communicate, optimise
benefits ;
IiI R?n.g8tir�(tan�a) - Leader of the business : lead with VISIon, secure best business
performance;
• K.aiwerowero - Challenger of the external enviroll1nents : know enviroll1nents, obtain
advantages, and overcome constraints.
FoMA independently prolnote their pnmary objective as 'to foster and promote the
development, sound management and economic advancement of Miiori authorities and in
that process to protect, to foster, and to advance the interests of the Federation '. Refer to
Appendix 8 for a more detailed breakdown of the Federation' s objectives and application of
their cultural model especially as it relates to the whenua hituru (traditional lands) .
8 1 At the time of writing, chairman of the Wakatu Board, Paul Morgan, was also Chief Executive of FoMA.
82 Source : www.foma.co.nz
1 65
8. 2. 5 Physical evaluation
Environmental
The case study block is known locally as 'Robbies Block' and is a 2ha block s i tuated on
Whakarewa Street, Motueka (Plate 1 0) . The block l ies on the outskirts of Motueka
township . At the time of the assessment it was bare ground and bordered on both sides by
privately owned land.
This block had recently (2002) been taken over from a lease arrangement and was under
assessment for future land use options, including the opportunity to plant in pear trees
(variety - Doyenne du cornice) to add to the established pipfruit orchards of the
incorporation. The full history of the block prior to the lease being purchased was
unknown, however the most recent 3 years had included Inaize crops (2) and grazing,
including horses.
The ground cover was primari ly in pasture grasses but included a range of weed species
including: buttercup (Ranunculus spp.) , clover (Trifolium spp.) , wild geranium (Geranium
dissectum), dock species (Rumex spp.) , nipplewort (Lapsana communis) and plantain
(Plantago spp) .
Soils
The soil type for this block as identified from the soil survey carried out by Paul Nelson in
2003 is characteristically a Riwaka silt lomn, the predominant soil type in the general
Motueka district (Nelson, 2003) . Riwaka soils are located on the floodplains of the Riwaka
and Motueka Rivers and include a range of physical attributes froln good to excessive
drainage characteristics, relatively low water holding capacity and a high soil bulk density .
The soils are of moderate to high natural chemical fertility with an average pH of 6 .4 but a
low content of potassium, especially in the subsoil (ibid. ) .
1 66
Plate 1 0 : Robbies Block looking to Whakarewa Street, Motueka (2004)
Soil Samples
A standard soil sampling technique was applied in obtaining a composite sample for
analysis from this block. Using an augur, ten 1 5cm cores were collected on 1 0 June 2004
from a random pattern over the block representative of the s ite . The soil sample was
analysed following standard soil testing procedures by the Fertiliser and Lime Research
Centre, Massey University. Palmerston North (Refer to Appendix 9 for test results) .
1 67
Soil Test Results
Table 8 .2 : Soil test results - Robbies Block, Wakatu Inc. Motueka.
Robbies MAF
Soil Test
Block 'Quicktest'
Olsen-P (�g/ g) 47.6 57
K (me/lOOg) 0.33 6
Calcium (Ca) (me/lOOg) 7.0 1 0
M g (me/lOOg) 1 . 1 3 3 1
Na (me/lOOg) 0 .03
pH 6.2 6 .2
CEC (me/lOOg) 1 1
Organ ic Matter (%) 2.3
Carbon (%) 1 .3
Total N itrogen (%) 0 . 1 1
Soi l Volume (g/ml) 1 .20
I-lg = micrograms; 9 = grams; me = mi l l iequivalent; m l = mi l l i l itre ;
Interpretation of results
Based on these results the nutrient status can be summarised from the results with regard to
the future use in horticulture, primarily taewa production, as :
•
•
Phosphorus is available at good levels
Potassium is present at a low level
Magnesium is present in a moderate level
pH 6 .2 is acceptable
Soil volume (bulk density) at 1 .20 is high
CEC at 1 1 is low
Nitrogen at 0 . 1 1 % is low
Organic matter content is low
Carbon content is low
Based on these results, the nutrient status of this b lock is satisfactory but lower than desired
for some key attributes relative to horticultural development. The low potassium and
1 68
ni trogen levels need to be considered for any land use (agricultural or horticultural) to be
undertaken on the block. A ferti l iser programme targeting superphosphate and potassium
or N:P :K products will improve this block and can be applied over several seasons to
gradual ly raise the soil nutrient status . The soil pH of 6.2 is acceptable for taewa or potato
crops. The soil volume of 1 .20 is high and along with the low organic matter content can be
improved with the addition of externally sourced organic matter to the topsoil .
Spatial
There is a considerable range of horticultural production in the general Motueka region.
Fruit and vegetable cropping are dominant land uses83 around Motueka and range from
pipfruit [ 1 30 1 ha] , kiwifruit [499ha] , hops [2 1 8ha] , berryfruit ( including blackcurrants)
[94ha] , grapes [SOha] and market gardens [37ha] producing a range of vegetable crops .
More recently, viticulture has become a common land use as wel l as p lantation forestry,
mainly in exotic species, on the steeper and less fertile lands of the region. Some smaller,
more intensive, horticultural operations also exist such as cut flower and specialist nursery
producers covering a wide range of crops from roses through to shelter tree species . There
are a considerable number of support industries located at both Motueka and Nelson as well
as the port at Nelson.
Climate
The Motueka climate is distinctive and temperate due to the topography of the region and
the coastal influence. The fol lowing summary is given using historical data collected at the
nearby Riwaka Research Station (HortResearch) . -A mean annual temperature of 1 2 . S0C is
achieved with a summer high of 1 7 .4°C (February) and winter low of 7 .0°C (July) (Figure
8 . 1 ) . The annual rainfall at the Riwaka site is 1 3 8 1 mm with twice as much rain received
over the winter months when compared with summer months (Figure 8 .2) . The average
annual sunshine hours are 2400 and typically there are 82 days of ground frosts from May
to September each year (NZMS, 1 983) . Frosts are described as local phenomena, often
specific to sites and areas in the region. They appear to be rarely experienced outside of the
83 Figures for production areas are taken from Nelson (2003) and are representative of the production mix in
the region.
1 69
winter and spring months . The fol lowing graphs are prepared from data recorded in de
Lisle & Kerr ( 1 965) .
Da i ly H igh & Low Temperatu res - Motueka District
30.0
25.0 ·
20.0 u
� 1 5.0 (1)
rn 10 .0 · (1) Cl 5.0 ·
0 . 0 . I- -- -.- -- -,.- --,- -,- -�" "" ""'"- -,- -_. ._ __': :=_ __.-:;:. .. .,_ __ _,_-_ __r_ __ _I
- 5 . 0 -'--_____ �_� ____ .._:..:.. _______ ....l
Figure 8 . 1 : Cl imate data, Motueka District - Temperatures (monthly averages)
Source: de Lisle & Kerr, 1 965
1 40 ·
1 20
1 00
80 mm 60
40
20
o ,
Rainfall Distribution
Motueka
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure 8 . 2 : Climate data, Motueka District - Rainfall distribution
Source: de Lisle & Kerr, 1 965
8. 2. 6 Capital evaluation
Within Wakatu Incorporation there is considerable cap ital available to invest in a
horticultural land use on this block. Wakatu have full production, packhouse and transport
plant and faci lities within one kilometre of this site as well as a compliment of staff with
appropriate skills in horticulture . This block is situated within the Motueka township and
other Wakatu land interests lie as near as 50m on Whakarewa Street. I t is intended to
1 70
contribute to the production systems aligned to the whole Wakatu interests around Motueka
township.
Structural
The block itself carries no structural assets other than the perimeter fencing and shelter.
Water can be accessed through town supply although a bore is being considered if
hort iculture is the final land use.
Investment
The incorporation is prepared to invest in this block to bring it into production in line with
other land they own or manage around Motueka.
Natural
Horticulture (fruit, vegetables and floriculture) is a key industry in the Motueka district
along with processed fisheries, agriculture and forestry. The only factor of note relative to
the natural capital is the availability of water which is becoming increasingly managed and
will l ikely impact on the more intensive production systems .
People
Wakatu have a large contingent of ful l-time and seasonal staff. Within the staff programme
they also have training initiatives and have full input from the Horticulture ITO for modular
staff training in horticulture . Outside of the production team, the incorporation also have a
suite of staff at the management and governance level and interests in aligned businesses
such as 'KONO' (an indigenous marketing brand developed by Wakatu Inc .) , whose focus
is on marketing and development of the indigenous brand for Wakatu products .
8. 2. 7 Economic evaluation
A SWOT analysis (Table 8 . 3) was undertaken as an economic evaluation for identifying
some key limitations and advantages with regard to the potential production on 'Robbies
B lock' using taewa as an example.
1 7 1
Table 8 . 3 : SWOT Analysis : taewa production on Robbies B lock, Wakatu Incorporation
. . Strengths . Weaknesses
• Cultural and values based organisation • Change to vegetable production a new direction
Incorporation, structure and acumen from perennial crops • Corporate decision making processes •
• Existing horticulture in region & infrastructure Specific skil ls in vegetable cropping •
• Skil l and expertise in horticulture
• Knowledge of regional resource
• Access to technology
Opportuniti�s.
> , '.t • . ;< , . . ; '" . Threats �t")- � , > : <. .� . '"
• Indigenous products and markets • Markets and fluctuations in money value
• New products to existing suite of products • S ingle block insufficient for crop rotation
• Build on cultural identity • Iwi politics
• Abil ity to uti l ise regional infrastructure
8.2. 8 Summary
The Wakatu Incorporation IS a well structured horticultural business managIng land
resources with a unique history and relationship to its owners . They are in a position to
invest in a change in land use providing it meets their criteria relative to the value systems
applied to the incorporation and business risk. The physical assessment identified a
resource well suited to taewa production and this has been complimented by the cultural ,
cap ital and economic assessments. The next step i s a strategically planned entry into taewa
production through the identification of machinery needs and access to certified seed.
The cultural assessment has identified some key cultural indicators which are appl icable to
the incorporation as a landowner representing a large number of shareholder interests .
Primarily, the whakapapa l inks of the shareholders creates a primary relationship to the
land. This is supported by knowledge of historical land use including soil and cropping .
characteristics, traditional and contemporary horticultural activities and the formal
identification of a value suite applicable to the activities of the incorporation. This is
further consolidated by the acknowledgement by both the entity and shareholders of key
aspirations for their land resources for their future generations.
1 72
8.3 Case Study 2 : Ngati Parewahawaha Hapii 0 Ngati Raukawa
8. 3. 1 I-listory - le toto
This case study focuses on a block aligned to Ngati Parewahawaha hapu of Ngati Raukawa
ki te tonga. The Section 1 4 1 C2A Ohinepuhiawe Block, Rangitoto Survey District, covers a
total area of OAha ( l acre) and is located off Domain Road, Bulls township. It l ies directly
beside Parewahawaha marae on its ' northern boundary. Access is from a ' right-of-way' off
Domain Road or, through the marae reservation.
Ngati Parewahawaha is a hapu of Ngati Raukawa within the Tainui federation of tribes.
The waka Tainui made its final landing at Kawhia on the west coast of the North Island
during the migration of Maori to Aotearoa and from there the people sett led and their
descendants spread. The following whakatauaki describes the seat of Tainui and hence
their identity :
Mokau ki runga, Tamaki ki raro. ko Pare Hauraki, ko Pare Wa ika to, Mangatoatoa
ki waenganui, ko te kaokaoroa 0 Patetere.
From the Mokau River to Tamaki-Makaurau (in the Auckland area) , the Hauraki
Plains and the Waikato River basin, Mangatoatoa and Patetere being the inland
areas, this indicates the extent of the area.
The origins of the migration of Ngati Raukawa to the Rangitikei lie with the migration of
Te Rauparaha and his Ngati Toa Rangatira kin in the early 1 820s. Te Rauparaha invited
Ngati Raukawa to follow him and assist in his c laim of utu or revenge against the
Muaupoko iwi and allocated them land around the Otaki region. During the period 1 826-
1 829 the Ngati Raukawa people journeyed over three distinct migrations, finally settl ing for
two years on Kapiti Island with Te Rauparaha before moving on to the land which had been
apportioned for them. At this point their settlement area was bounded by a p lace known as
Miria te Kakara at present day Kakariki on the Rangitikei River to Kukutauaki Stream
which lies between Otaki and Waikanae. As of 1 840 or the s igning of the Treaty of
Waitangi , Ngati Raukawa were considered the occupying tribe around the Rangitikei River
from Kakariki to the sea whilst allowing Ngati Apa to continue their occupation on some
sites under sufferance (Anderson & Pickens, 1 996). In the 1 869 hearing of the Rangitikei
Manawatu claims to the Well ington Native Land Court the court found that Ngati
1 73
Parewahawaha and other Ngati Raukawa hapu had settled peaceably and permanently aside
the Rangitikei River with Ngati Apa at their invitation and effectively created an integrated
cOImnunity with conjoint rights (ibid. ) .
The hapu Ngati Parewahawaha descend from Parewahawaha, a direct female descendant of
Raukawa from whom the iwi take their name. The majority of this hapu came south from
the Maungatautari area of Waikato during the final stages of the migration of Ngati Toa
Rangatira in the late 1 820s in the journey known as (Te heke mai raro (Arapere, 1 999). Te
Nge 0 Raukawa, a son of Parewahawaha was an old man at the time and travel led south and
it was he who settled at Ohinepuhiawe with his whanau (family) .
The flat land upstream of the Bulls SH I (State Highway 1 ) bridge aside the western bank of
the Rangitikei River - in its current course - and accessed from Domain Road at the
northern end of the present Bulls township, is the area earlier known as Ohinepuhiawe by
the Ngati Parewahawaha inhab itants . This river flat constituted part of the kainga or
settlement for this hapu leading also to the site of the present day marae, also known as
Parewahawaha (Plate 1 1 ) .
8. 3. 2 Entity
The Parewahawaha marae trustees have been informally leasing the b lock under study
(Ohinepuhiawe B lock 1 4 1 C2A - Refer to P lates 1 3 & ] 4) from the whanau owners for the
last ten years, paying the rates and other costs as appropriate and grazing or cropping, also
as appropriate. The whanau owners are absentee owners, almost entirely domici led in the
Auckland region and not actively involved in marae or land related affairs at present.
The long-term objectives for assessing this b lock include :
•
•
•
•
•
To ensure the continuation of whakapapa associations between whenua and whanau
Maintenance and application of tikanga-a-iwi
Economic development of the b lock;
Profitabi li ty of the block through commercial crop production/horticulture;
Creation of employment opportunities through alternative land uses.
1 74
The trustees are looking to achieve these objectives by considering alternative land
management options and through diversifying risk management.
Plate 1 1 : Parewahawaha marae, Bulls
Parewahawaha Marae
Plate 1 2 : Aerial view of Bulls district indicating Parewahawaha Marae
1 75
Plate 1 3 : Parewahawaha Marae and surrounds - Section 1 4 1 C2A Ohinepuhiawe
block is the ploughed paddock to the right of the buildings
Plate 1 4 : Ohinepuhiawe Block 1 4 1 C2A (Spring 2005)
1 76
8. 3. 3 Cultural evaluation
Kosmos
Ngati Parewahawaha and the whanau that whakapapa to the specific block of land under
study align to Tainui waka as indicated in the following pepeha:
Corpus
Ko Tainui te waka
Ko Tararua te maunga
Ko Rangitikei te awa
Ko Ohinepuhiawe te whenua
Ko N gati Parewahawaha te hapu
The marae trustees consider the value set which applies to this land is the same they
identify for the marae and hapu in general . Table 8 .4 identifies the core values and it is
important to recognise they exist because of each other so cannot, and should not, be
segregated from each other - in other words they exist as a holistic set of values . They are :
Table 8 .4 : Core values identified by Ngati Parewahawaha
Wbakapapa Recognis ing whanaungatanga, the relationship between the people
and the resource and all other components of the physical world
which contributes to the continued well being.
Manaakitariga Contribution to hospitality within the whanau and hapu group and
. ' with external groups - manuhiri. A contribution to mana .
Tikanga-a-iwi
' "
Recognising specific tikanga or processes appropriate to the hapu
: and iwi aligned to the resource and the whanau as recognised
owners of the land under study.
Kotahitanga '.' Unity among all hapu and iwi alike
Wairuat�nga Spiri tuali ty - in all its forms. A recognition of a higher being and
\ ' the relationship it has in our daily lives.
. Kaitiakitanga "", The responsibility to manage the resources for the benefit of all
who may draw on them for their well being and for their identity -
not just for the present generations but for all those yet to come.
Rangatirata�ga <. .' The abi lity to take control of the inputs and influences on our
people and to make pertinent decisions which affect N gati
Parewahawaha and all iwi - self determination
Mana whenua .. , Retention of our mana or status over the land resources which
contribute to the identity and sustenance of the hapu
Source: P Richardson, NgatI Parewahawaha (personal commUnICatIOn - 30 December 2005)
1 77
It is important to note these values are drawn from the same Maori worldview that Te
Atiawa base their value set for Wakatu lands and also the combined Maori membership of
the Tahuri Whenua collective. Additionally, i t i s important for the hapu and whanau
owners of this block to be mindful of the history of the occupation ofNgati Parewahawaha
on the land b lock and the relationship all families of the hapu have to the block.
Praxis
The lands are known to be fertile alluvial flats and have been used for a range of returns in
past decades from pastoral to horticultural . Ngati Parewahawaha fully understands the
origin of the silt soils through the flood actions of the Rangitikei River and that they
originate from the headwaters or catchment of the river itself. Neither the block nor marae
land are prone to any frequent flooding; the February 2003 floods reached the boundary of
these lands but did not flood them per se. The proximity of the land to the marae and
papakainga or settlement also impacts on the potential uti l ity of the land. The ideal
scenario for the hapu is that this land takes advantage of its natural fertil ity and proximity to
the community through being uti lised for intensive horticultural production, primarily food
crops, which will benefit the whole community.
8. 3. 4 Physical evaluation
Environmental
Section 1 4 1 C2A Ohinepuhiawe B lock lies directly off Domain Road, Bulls flanking the
eastern boundary of Parewahawaha marae. It is on the river terrace aligned to the
Rangitikei River which flows some 200-300m east of the block. The topography is flat and
the block has good access from the road and via the marae. In recent years the b lock has
been cropped in annual crops such as pumpkins, potatoes, and klnga to supply the marae
and allowed to revert to weedy growth during off-season periods . Currently (late 2006)
there . is re-growth of weeds often found in pasture such as Californian (Cirsium arvense)
and Scotch (Cirsium vulgare) thistles and broad-leafed dock (Rumex obtusifolius) and a
number of other weeds which would need to be cleared before any intensive production
system is instigated.
1 78
Water can be sourced from the town supply through the marae for any irrigation purposes .
No she lter exists specifical ly on the block and this may need to be considered for any
change in land use. Fencing is satisfactory for the present land use.
There is opportunity for the marae trustees to enter into lease arrangements with several
owners of neighbouring land blocks to increase the avai lable land base for any horticultural
initiative . This includes 2 hectares belonging to the Rangitikei District Counci l on the
opposite side of DOlnain Road.
Soil
Based on the infonnation recorded for this district the soi l type for this b lock is a soil
c lassified as Rangitikei fine sandy loam. This soi l is classed as a rapidly accumulating
Recent Soil which occurs on the relatively frequently flooded low river terraces. It is a wel l
drained soil with a fine sandy loam texture and relatively thick top horizon . General ly this
is a naturally fertile soil and can be used for fattening stock, dairying, grazing and cropping
on areas protected from flooding. Pastures on these soils tend to dry out during summer
(CampbeU, 1 978 ; Cowie, 1 978) .
Soil Samples
The latest soil sample was taken on December 30th 2005 . A composite sample ( 1 0 cores
from a I S -cm depth) was collected on a diagonal through the accessible centre of the block.
The soil sample was analysed fol lowing standard soil testing procedures by R J Hi l l
Laboratories Ltd, Ruakura, Hamil ton (at the request of the trustees for comparison purposes
with earlier tests) .
Soil Test Results
Tests were undertaken for key nutrients used in determining the ferti l iser requirements of
pasture and horticultural production. The results are summarised in Table 8.5 (See
Appendix 1 0 for soil test results) . The 2005 results are similar to the results of soil tests
taken in 2003 .
1 79
Table 8 . 5 : Soil test results - Section 14 1 C2A Ohinepuhiawe B lock, Parewahawaha
Parewahawaha MAP Parewahawaha MAF
SoH Test
Nov 2003 Quicktest 2005 Quickiest
Olsen-P (mg/litre) 6.7 6 6 6
Available N (kg/ha) 1 1 3 1 1 3
K (me/lOOg) 0.60 8 0.44 8
Calcium (Ca) (me/lOOg) 7 .8 8
Mg (me/lOOg) 1 .39 28
pH 6.0 6 .0 5 . 9 5 . 9
CEC (me/1 OOg) 1 5 1 5
Organic Matter (% ) 5 . 2 5 .2
Base Saturation (% ) 65 65
Soil Volume (g/ml) 0.83 0 .83 0 .88 0 .88
g = grams; me = milliequivalent; ml = millil itre; kg = kilogram; ha = hectare
Results Analysis
Based on these results the nutrient status can be summarised from the results with regard to
future horticultural use, primari ly taewa production, as :
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Phosphorus is available at an extremely low level
Potassium is present at a low level
Magnesium is present in a moderate level
pH 5 . 9 is s lightly low but acceptable
Soil volume (bulk density) at 0 . 88 is good
CEC at 1 5 is acceptable
Nitrogen at a rate of 1 1 3 kg/ha is low
Organic matter content is relatively low
Based on the above results, the nutrient status of this b lock is lower than desired for any
horticultural development. The very low phosphorus level wil l need to be addressed before
any further land use (agricultural or horticultural) is considered or appl ied to the block. A
fertiliser programme which targets superphosphate and potassium or N :P :K products will
1 80
initiate improvements to this block and can be appl ied over several seasons to gradually
improve the soil nutrient status.
The soil pH of pH5 .9 is at a slightly acidic level but acceptable for a change in land use to
taewa production. The pH should be maintained at around 6 .0 for taewa crops. The soil
volume of 0 . 88g/ml is acceptable, and with time and the correct soil management
programme such as minimal tillage, the soil structure will continue to improve.
Spatial
There is a considerable range of horticulture production in the general Bulls-Rangitikei
regIOn. Arable and vegetable cropping are commonplace and range from potatoes,
asparagus and squash to grain crops and hay and si lage. Some smaller, more intensive,
horticultural operations also exist such as cut flower and specialist nursery producers
covering a wide range of crops from roses through to shelter tree species .
Palmerston North l ies approximately 25 kilometres to the east and is the centre for
agricultural and horticultural activities in the region with a considerable number of support
industries located there. Fei lding and Marton are both nearby towns which also have a
number of agricultural support industries and potential markets. Bulls is located at the
junction of State Highways One and Three between Auckland, Well ington and
Wanganui/Taranaki and offers considerable opportunity to transport produce or goods
between many locations in the North Island.
Climate
The Rangitikei region has a temperate cl imate with an average rainfal l of 950mm per year,
spread relatively evenly throughout the year. It is one of the driest areas of the North Island
and inadequate rainfal l during the summer months may affect any production system.
Hailstorms are infrequent with up to 7 occurrences annually during winter or spring. The
Rangitikei/Manawatu region records up to 2000 sunshine hours per year with an average
summer temperature of 1 7 .7°C and 8 .9°C during winter. February is the warmest month
with a maximum average temperature of 22 .5°C and July the coldest with an average
1 8 1
minimum of 4.4°C. Frosts are a common occurrence with nearby Ohakea recording an
average of 44 ground frosts annual ly - predominantly over the winter months through to
October. However, the mean annual soil temperature is 1 2 .7°C at I Q-cm depth. The
predominant winds are from the northwest fol lowed by the west or southeast winds
(NZMS, 1 982) .
Da ily High & low Temperatures - Ohakea District
2 5 . 0 ,...--:-------:.----:---..,.-----:--:----;-------,
20.0
c; 1 5.0 Q) Q)
� 1 0.0 o
5.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure 8 . 3 : Climate data, Ohakea District - Temperatures (monthly averages)
Source: NZMS, 1 982
Rainfal l Distribution - Ohakea District
100
90
80
70
60 -
mm 50 40
30
20
1 0
o . Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Qct Noy Dec
Figure 8 .4 : Climate data, Ohakea District - Rainfall distribution
Source: NZMS, 1 982
8. 3. 5 Capital evaluation
Structural
Very little structural capital exists for the trustees to access for horticulture land use. The
marae is in the adjoining block and provides toilet and staff facilities as required. Access to
1 82
tractor and harvest Inachinery for taewa is already determined on a cooperative basis with
local hapCi members .
Investment
The ability to invest In a new production system is limited due to the nature of the
ownership structure applied to the b lock and the arrangement the marae trustees have for its
use. The trustees wil l always be restricted in their abi lity to invest financially in new
initiati yes on land over which they have limited governance and need to look at broader
options e.g. iwi or government policies to achieve this .
Natural
The block is located within the town boundary and has access to town supply water, good
roading, transport and storage facilities .
People
Whilst there is a recognised need to consider the ski l l base accessible to the trustees,
because the economic uti lity of a single land block is unlikely to create a full-time
employment position, the initiative wi l l depend on part-time input from key people wIthIn
the hapu. A key output for the hapu wil l be the growth of any crop production system to
creating employment and training opportunities and thus a level of self-sustainabili ty for
the future .
8. 3. 6 Economic evaluation
The SWOT analysis (Table 8 .6, following page) identifies key l imitations and advantages
with regard to taewa production on the Section 1 4 1 C2A Ohinepuhiawe B lock.
8. 3. 7 Summary
The Ohinepuhiawe 1 4 1 C2A block is l imited in size and investment opportunity however it
does present i tself as a suitable resource for taewa production. The Ngati Parewahawaha
trustees are forward thinking in their desire to initiate a production system on land available
to them which could be built into a successful operation through strategic management and
1 83
direction over the next few years . They have a strong foundation in their culture and values
which wi l l not be compromised in a change of land use to taewa production. The cultural
cOlnponent of their management system could in fact be a positive factor in the future
producti on and/or Inarketing of their produce.
Table 8 . 6 : SWOT Analysis : taewa production on Ohinepuhiawe 14 1 C2A
•
•
Strengths
Access directly off publ ic road
Central location
,
•
•
. .. Weaknesses
Relatively small area of land
Limited investment opportunity
., . ,
• Flat topography of the block
Access to advice and/or expertise as required
Cultural integrity al igned to block & future
outputs
• Available resources - in machinery, structures
and labour • • Skil l/expertise in horticultural cropping systems
•
• Reliance on one or two key people
• Knowledge of block history & characteristics
Opportunities . , • 'C' Threats
• To create a niche product aligned to hapu • Lack of investment opportunity
. ', "
• Potential seasonal market in region • Public scrutiny if reliant on public funding
• Extend production into related areas e.g. training • Small and monocultural operation
• Contribute to hapu and/or marae development
• Other available land nearby
A key strength for the trustees is their intimate knowledge of the land block, soils resource
and physical attributes in the locality. Their continuous occupation of the b lock and wider
relationship with all ied resources such as the Rangitikei River means there is a body of
knowledge which can be used beneficially in the future land use on the block. This case
study has further identified some key cultural indicators for future assessment of land
including : whakapapa association to the land, iwi and hapu based values, an intimate
knowledge of resource characteristics and historical utility and the aspirations of the people
for sound and economic utility of the resources.
1 84
8.4 Case Study 3 : Tahuri Whenua Inc. Soc.
8. 4. 1 History of establishment
There is an old whakatauaki that draws on a horticultural analogy and supports the
collective approach being pursued by Tahuri Whenua Inc. Soc : Anei te ringa tango otaota.
( 'Here is the hand that does the weeding' ; a compl iment to industriousness).
During 2004 a core collective of Maori vegetab le producers took their needs in hand and
established a representative body which was approved by the Inland Revenue Departlnent
and registered as an incorporated society . The entity is Tahuri Whenua Inc. Soc. (Tahuri
Whenua) ; translated in simple terms as, returning to the land. Tahuri Whenua is based in
Palmerston North however its membership and governing committee are drawn from
throughout New Zealand from Kaitaia to Riverton . Members range from individuals to iwi,
hapu, whanau or trusts as well as some schools and Maori centred entities. They represent
their own land and horticultural interests which are as diverse as their locations and
management structures.
While Tahuri Whenua has been established to represent the Maori interest in the vegetable
sector, it is also broad enough to consider related matters such as traditional and non
traditional production systems, markets, indigenous branding, education and research
needs. Thus far there has been widespread and positive support from the growers involved
and from the general horticulture sector.
Tahuri Whenua was established to provide a national Maori entity representing Maori
interests in the horticultural sector. The rationale behind the establishment of Tahuri
Whenua includes (Roskruge, 2004) :
• The need for a Maori presence in existing sector interests such as HortNZ, MAP
and training and research institutions - there is a need to participate in, rather than
compete with, such structures.
• The need for a structure which could participate in the sector and also provide for
tikanga, matauranga Maori and other components of the modem Te Ao Maori .
1 85
strategic p lan and is used to facil itate the day-to-day operations of the organisation to
achieve its core objectives. This plan highlights a number of actions the collective need to
consider for the future including :
11 Purchase professional input where possible
11 Create policy for information management
11 Create templates for relationships, quality assurance, monitoring and evaluation and
reporting
11 Ensuring support systems exist for the kaumatua group (within Tahuri Whenua)
Dispute Resolution Plan
An important need identified in the operational plan is a dispute resolution process suited to
the organisation which draws on both cultural and ethical values, potential ly unique to the
organisation itself. This is a risk management tool used to prevent the breakdown of
relationships.
Education Plan
Tahuri Whenua is well aware of the need to consider education, training and development
within the Maori community to work towards positive economic development for Maori
and preparing upcoming generations to succeed the current managers of the land resources
and culture to be the future leaders within New Zealand society for generations to come.
Policy Development Plan
The strategic plan for Tahuri Whenua identified two key objectives that are the basis of the
policy development plan :
1 . To promote a collaborative Maori approach to horticulture within the wider horticulture
industry, and
2 . To facil i tate full Maori participation i n the horticulture industry .
Communication Plan
Communication is one of the key obj ectives to facilitate full Maori participation in the
horticulture industry. This can only be achieved through sound and consistent
communication processes which support and compliment the core business of the Tahuri
1 88
Whenua col lective . The communication plan is a tool to assist In identify ing how to
participate with all stakeholders and the community of interest relevant to the core business
of the entity. It also takes advantage of all the various cOlrununication technologies and
processes available in the current business world.
Tahuri Whenua Inc. Soc. has had a very positive beginning in terms of development and
entrenchment within the industry and Maori society and one where they are gaining wide
acceptance by the horticultural community . A lot of effort has been appl ied by members to
getting the kaupapa or purpose out to the community and there is now around 200 members
including individuals, kaumatua, growers, supporters, schools, marae and trusts .
8. 4. 3 Land use decision systems and taewa production
Tahuri Whenua have been in a key position to contribute to the assessment and decision
criteria Maori land owners access in the process of determining any proposed change in
land use. The collective has been able to provide some direction to Maori land owners
entering the commercial horticul tural sector, including the opportunity to network and
interact with other producers (and potential producers) in both formal and informal fora
(hui) . In recent years the growing consumer interest in taewa or Maori potatoes has created
a demand for this product. As the bulk of the seed tuber stock needed to produce
commercial volumes of the crop are held by Maori interests, the opportunity for Maori to
bring land into commercial production to meet consumer demands is high. Tahuri Whenua
has been able to act as an unbiased conduit of information regarding cropping systems for
taewa and cultural considerations for producers .
Alongside the flow of information between Tahuri Whenua and its members there is also a
growing input from research and development opportunities (and outputs) which the
collective has been able to facilitate in its capacity as a national representative body. An
example of this was a project which used t issue culture techniques to eliminate inherent
vinlses from the seed tuber stock of taewa. This was achieved over a three year process
and has now reached the stage where the virus-free stock is being bulked up for commercial
producers and wi l l become avai lable to the members of the collective in the very near
1 89
future. This is seen as a positive contributor to the econolnic returns producers of the crop
can gain from their resource. More research projects al igned to taewa and other
' indigenous' crops have been strategically identified and will be contributors to the Maori
horticultural sector in future years.
8. 4. 4 Summary
By creating an entity specifically to build on the positive contribution of Maori and Maori
resources to the economy through horticulture, Maori have also created an entity that can
look to identifying and recording matauranga Maori relative to traditional horticulture and
pedology or soil science. Ethnopedology has not been formal ly acknowledged or
researched at this point in time. It is timely to attempt to capture more infonnation, in
whatever form, that can contribute to the remnant of knowledge apparent to Maori today.
The elder generation within Maori society are the last repositories of this type of knowledge
in a primary data format, i .e . they practised and learnt their knowledge first-hand. The
majority of subsequent generations will be exponents of secondary data relative to
pedology i .e . they will have been taught or exposed to the information through a primary
source. This s ignifies an important role for the Tahuri Whenua col lective in both collecting
the relative matauranga through cul turally appropriate means to be managed, including
dissemination, by Maori for Maori and educational resources . This will contribute to the
rangatiratanga of Maori as a whole and ultimately the economic opportunity for Maori .
This case study has identified a generic pan-Maori approach to horticulture in the 2 1 st
century. From this approach several factors are identifiable that can contribute to cultural
indicators for Maori land assessment. Primari ly the whakapapa relationship of landowners
to the resource is undeniable. The diversity of knowledge relative to historical and
contemporary horticulture and soil management is very apparent as is the knowledge held
by in�ividuals and communities alike regarding historical land use and the 'ki uta ki tai '
concept of a resource from its source to its natural end. Lastly, the aspirations of Maori as a
whole to their economic future through horticulture and appropriate resource (and soils)
management are becoming more and more important to successive generations.
1 90
Plate 1 5 : Tahuri Whenua hui, Te Keete Marae, Otorohanga, 2003
Plate 1 6 : Hangi to complete harvest activities, Tahuri Whenua members, 23 March 2006
1 9 1
8.5 Chapter summary
The case studies have introduced three quite distinct Maori entities aligned to land
resources, horticulture and the management of soils in particular. The intent of undertaking
a multiple-case approach was to highlight the variability within the Maori community of
the identification and application of cultural values in their soils assessment and
horticultural activities and also recognising that evidence drawn from multiple case studies
is often considered more compelling in the overall study and therefore considered more
robust (Yin, 1 994) . The key points identified through these case studies are ultilnately
contributors to the overall investigative processes and will add to the validation of the
model presented in this thesis .
All three entities - Wakatu Inc. , Ngati Parewahawaha Hapu (Trustees) and, Tahuri Whenua
Inc . Soc. - base their existence in whakapapa processes which identify them as Maori
entities. They identify a suite of values which are considered the basis of their activities.
This value suite is not necessarily exhaustive or binding on the entity and is also variable
between entities, ostensibly because of the diverse inputs each receives from its
stakeholders . The affiliation however, between the whakapapa element and value suite, is
highly pertinent to each entity and reflects their history, experiences, future directions,
expectations and relationships, ultimately identifying them in a distinctive way.
As examples of Maori participation in horticulture and soil or resource management in the
2 1 st century, the case studies have also identified the fact that Maori participate at different
levels in the primary sectors, even within their own community, and that some are more
inclusive of traditional matauranga and systems inputs, whether or not they have been
validated through any external processes. The locus of traditional knowledge is shown to
be important to the decision criteria applied by land owners and this locus is invariably
influenced by the cultural tikanga of the same land-owners or decision making group . It i s
a unique body of knowledge which is seen to compliment the land management processes
and the ability of the landowners to participate in New Zealand' s horticulture industry.
1 92
Chapter 9 : Model
9.1 Introduction
In the introduction to this thesis it was stated that the thesis aims to produce a distinctive
framework or model for the horticultural development of Maori resources, primarily land,
inclusive of tikanga Maori and indigenous production systems based on the unique body of
knowledge aligned to Maori . The integration of this knowledge with western science will
be argued and applied through the framework or model itself.
9.2 Establishing a framework
A framework is a tool for converting observations into insights, useful for explaining
development already achieved and to provide a basis for thinking about the future (NZIER,
2003) . The term model is used by scientists to convey an implication of order and systems
approach to theory. Models are ultimately a simplification of information drawn from
paradigms or larger bodies of knowledge that allow for the examination of relationships
between factors (Hoover & Donovan, 200 1 ) .
9.3 Maori resource assessment model
This Maori resource assessment model has been formulated drawing from all the current
assessment tools applied to horticultural land use in New Zealand and the matauranga or
body of traditional knowledge existing around land and land use. Primari ly the cultural
component is formulated in response to the matauranga identified in this thesis and is
focus sed on three areas; whakapapa and the values aligned to it, pedological knowledge and
horticultural knowledge.
The model is presented in four configurations :
1 . a diagrammatic representation of the assessment factors (Figure 9 . 1 ) ;
2 . a table identifying the four critical assessment fields, subfields & indicators (Table 9 . 1 ) ;
3 . a breakdown of cultural indicators (Table 9 .2) ; and,
4. an implementation pathway (Figure 9.2) .
1 93
Physical
climate
Spatial
/ external
Cultural
Indllstll'
Pr([xi.
people
Natural
/ internal
Economic
'tructural
Figure 9 . 1 : Visual representation of Maori resource assessment model
Capital
The visual representation in Figure 9 . 1 is a simplified systems approach to the assessment
tool which also indicates the overlaps between assessment (sub )fields and ultimately the
holistic nature of the relationship between factors which will contribute to the final decision
on the land-use opportunity. The breakdown of the assessment process into four quadrants
is important as it recognises the different influences on Maori land and on Maori
management processes and allows for their interaction with each other and within the
system as a whole .
1 94
Table 9 . 1 : Model for assessment of Maori land
Fields Sub-fields Indicators
Cultural Kosmos Te Ao Maori; Wbakapapa, Cultural lndir;ators (Cl)
(Xl) [ of whenua and owners] as de�erinined by
Corpus Matauranga (incl. iWilhaptllwhiinau
traditional horticulture & e.g. historical land use or
pedology) crop choice (Refer lo Cl
Praxis Tikanga (ip-cl. people). Tabl? 9.2, page j 97) _ _
Physical Environmental Topography, Jlood/ erosion , Based o""n appropriate,
(X2) , hazards, wat�r resources; technology where
windrun individual factors are
Physical - drainage� texture ranked additively or
wetness, WHC, structure, incrementally according
stoniness, biological, tQ their: influence on land
temperatures, potential root use
depth, Chemical -pH, CEC, '
org'anic matter, nutrients
Spatial Topography, mapped
characteristics, location;
regional infrastructure
Climatic Frosts, rainfall, sunshine
hours, temperature, hail,
wind, GDD, chiU period
Capital Structural Buildings, roading, water Ce,!slls of caPital and '
(X3) reticulation, fencing identification of standing
Investment Equipm�nt, land area value to land use
Natural Shelter, water, location
People Skills, experience
Ec�nomic Industry . Politics, research & ReView of external and
(x..) development, technology in/tJrnal jq.ctors e.g. ,
. Internal O�ership structures, SWOT or PEST analys.is
political factors, skills .
Markets, services, political, Include owner
location, education
The model is created using the analogy of Y=f(xI , X2, X3, . . . . Xn)84 . Here Y is the assessment
decision or output ( i .e . suitable horticultural activity) which is a function (f) of a series of
four critical factors (X I to X4); cultural, physical, capital and economic .
84 Analogy drawn from principles introduced in McPherson et al., 1 970
1 95
9.4 Cultural Indicators (Cl) for Maori land assessment model
Accepting that indicators and ranking systems exist for the physical, capital and economic
assessments, indicators suited to the cultural (Maori) assessment in relation to a
horticultural option and soil resources can be relatively specific. The cultural indicators
identified (refer to Table 9 .2) are al l drawn from the kosmos element, similar to the
overarching goals and objectives any business entity would establish as their guiding
principles for their future success . The indicators are all appl icable to land management in
a horticultural context and wil l also contribute to the maintenance of the mauri (l ife force or
cultural integrity) aligned to the resource as wel l as the cultural association or whakapapa
of the community of interest to the resource.
It is important to apply the cultural indicators in context with the remaining assessment as
they cannot, and should not, be isolated because any future land use will be influenced by
all these factors in some way. The key point of difference for this model is the
identification and application of cultural indicators that impact on land use, present and
future. There is also a variation from most other ethnopedological research which focuses
on communities and knowledge primarily related to subsistence economies and therefore
with a different relationship to the soil resource than contemporary Maori who now l ive in
a non-subsistence economy.
Maori cultural indicators are primari ly drawn from the whakapapa link to the resource and
to others who have an interest in the same land. Of the indicators identified, not all can be
modified to meet the needs of any change in land use. Whakapapa is an example of a
unique Maori element to be considered in assessment processes which cannot be modified
in any way. The identification of values, kaitiaki or mauri also draws from the unique
Maori element and is strongly aligned to the group who have primary rights over the land.
However, some other Maori or cultural elements such as the knowledge of, or application
of, traditional knowledge systems can be modified through continued learning or exposure
to that element. The traditional knowledge and management applied to the soils resource
may also al low for modification of the soil as appropriate to any change in land use .
1 96
Table 9 .2 : Cultural Indicators (Cl)
Cl Definition Key points Modifiable Y/N
l . Whakapapa With in group; Whakapapa of group N
relationship to the Whakapapa of resource
resource; including taxonomy of soils
kaitiaki role
2 . Tu tangata Skills/ ex pertise within Census of group - identify Y
[ iwi/hapu] group skills and ski l l gaps
3 . Values (kaitiaki) Cultural value set or Whakapapa, matauranga, N
priorities applicable to t ikanga, agree men t of
the resource group. Identify kaitiaki
4 . Mauri . , Quality of the resource Identify status of mauri of Y
resource and factors which
affect it
5 . Historical land use Earlier utility & when; Whakapapa, matauranga, N
productivity of land - identified by discussion
role as mahinga kai * with land users, neighbours Y
6 . Horticulture Know ledge or Matauranga and tikanga Y
- traditional application of associated with these
traditional systems factors
7. Horticulture Know ledge of Matauranga and tikanga Y
- contemporary contemporary systems associated with these,
and opportunities especially markets/products
8 . Soil - physical Knowledge of texture, Assessment based on Y
structure, moisture and cultural interpretation of
landform these factors
9. Soil - biological Know ledge or presence Visual assessment based on Y
of key vegetation or cultural interpretation of
biology e .g. these factors
earthworms
1 0. Soil - other Fertil ity , workabil ity, Assessment based on Y
response to cl imate cultural interpretation of Y
these factors
1 1 . Soil - limitations Knowledge of key Whakapapa, matauranga, Y
l imitations e .g. water discussion with land users,
holding capacity, neighbours
erosion, stoniness
1 2 . Ki uta ki .tai Knowledge of s ite to Whakapapa, matauranga, N
(landform) wider resources e .g . , identified by discuss ion
origin of water table, with land users , neighbours N
erosion type Y
1 3 . Te Ao Hurihuri · Aspirations of the Petitioning of group - Y
(the future world) people to the resource identification of goals and
objectives
* Mahinga kat ; harvestable food resource
1 97
I t i s expected that these cultural factors will cOlnpliment the remaining asseSSlnent through
the introduction of another dimension to the land resource and the abi lity of this dimension
to contribute to a wider economic approach to the resources for the Maori cor ununity .
9 .5 Decision matrix
The inputs to this model are based on functional relationships between knowledge and
proposed outcomes in land use. The full assessment must be amalgamated and considered
in a decision process to determine the final outcome and consideration of the change in land
use. Using the analogy already identified of Y=f(x l , X2, X3, . . . . xn) where Y is the
assessment decision or output ( i .e . suitable horticultural activity) and is a function (t) of
four critical factors (XI to X4) ; cultural, physical, capital and economic, the relevance and
weighting given to each factor needs to first be determined by the land owners . An
example of the decision matrix would be a bifurcating truth table where crops will succeed
if all input requirements are met or fai l otherwise, or additive factors where each addit ional
factor is combined additively and applied to the appropriate approach/utility or, where
limiting factor relationships are identified and applied. An example follows as Table 9 .3 :
Table 9 .3 : Sample decis ion matrix using success/fai l approach.
Assessment
. �ultural Xl .
Physical X2
Capital X3
Economic X4
Field - critical factors
Kosmos - Te Ao Maori . - -
Corpus - Matauranga
Pr�is - Tikanga
Environmental
Soils ' .. � . .
Spatial
Clii:mitic
Structural
Investm�nt
, Natural
Pe�op1i _ '.
Industry
In!ernal
External
Appropriate
es/no
- � �
To be determined by land-
owners with input from cultural,
technic�l an..d_p.l!sim:.s� expert� .
1 98
9.6 Implementation pathway
An implementation pathway has been diagrammatically prepared for the benefit of the
community of interest who would become the primary applicants of this assessment model.
This pathway summarises all the key factors already introduced as part of the model itself.
Maori land assessment model-implementation pathway
Step 1 : IdentifY block for assessment
Legal. cultural and historical identities to be determined
Step 2:
CUltural assessment
Objectives & indicators
=:>Kosmos
=:>Corpus
=:>Praxis
Step 5:
Step 3:
Physical assessment
Objectives & indicators
=:> Environmental
=:>Soil
=:>Spatial
=:>Climatic
Step 4:
Capital assessment
Objectives & indicators
=> Structural
=> Investment
=:>Natural
=:>People
Economic assessment
Objectives & indicators
=:>Indusby
=>Internal
=:>External
Step 6:
Determination of suitable landuse
through decision matrix.
mplementatlon and review
Figure 9 .2 : Implementation pathway for Maori land assessment model
1 99
9.7 Physical indicators
Several approaches to the physical assessment of land for future land uses in New Zealand
are well established and documented (for example Webb & Wilson, 1 994), such that other
than identifying the range of attributes normally assessed and aligning the attribute
standards to an intended horticultural use, no further comment is required.
In general, the physical attributes can be categorised into four areas or fields for assessment
and follow through: environmental, soil, spatial and climatic.
1 . Environmental - includes the assessment of localised and regional environmental
factors such as erosion risk or hazards, flood risk, accessible water resources and
quality, impact from or to other resource uses, topography and so on.
2 . Soil - usually segregated into physical and chemical sub-fields for assessment.
Physical will include the drainage characteristics of the soil, water holding capacity
(WHC), wetness limitations, structure, texture, stoniness, biological components, water
budgets and temperature variations . Chemical includes a range of assessments,
primarily undertaken on soil samples in a laboratory. These include, pH, CEC,
phosphate retention, organic matter levels and specific nutrient levels, and should be
undertaken with the future land use in mind.
3 . Spatial - this field i s in reference to the relationship o f the physical resource to its wider
location. There has been considerable work undertaken over many years which maps
resource catchments, soil, climatic and physical characteristics and the influence of
location on land use options. This information needs to be drawn together and
considered in the decision matrix. The historical land use of the land under assessment
and regional infrastructure are also important and need consideration under this field.
4 . Climatic - if horticultural land use is the option then climatic factors are crucial to
determining the final crop choice. Climatic factors will include; frost - frequency and
severity; rainfall, sunshine hours and temperature - monthly highs and lows and annual
amounts; hail, snow and wind factors; chill periods, risk evaluations of wet or dry years
and growing degree days (GDD). All are standard meteorological factors and
requirements are reasonably well known for most crops, more so than the soil
requirements for crops.
200
9.8 Capital indicators
Four fields have been applied to the capital assessment; structural, investment, natural and
people. A census of all four fields needs to be undertaken to contribute to the decision
process . Aside from the availability of capital , the quality and valuation of the capital
needs to be considered along with any need to invest in maintenance or upgrades to ensure
its ' uti l ity. Any limitation in capital can have a significant effect on final land use options .
1 . Structural - this field is in reference to the structural or physical capital in the form of
bui ldings, plant, roading, infrastructure e.g. fencing or water reticulation, which will be
available to future managers of the proposed production.
2. Investment - essential ly the financial position of the assessment, especially in the value
of technology and other resources - including land - available to future production.
3 . Natural - capital in this form can b e identified i n the form o f natural shelter, access to
water - including springs and water courses, access or uti lity of other resources,
location to key resources or faci lities, and the condition and maintenance costs of these
assets.
4. People - a two-pronged approach to the 'people' component of the assessment
approach is required. Firstly a census of the group aligned to the resources needs to be
undertaken to identify potential skills and experience that could contribute to the change
in land-use. Secondly, it is important that land development for Milori is not
independent of people development in some form. There is a need to recognise the
opportunity to build the skill base of the group through an alliance to education and
training initiatives aligned to the future land use e.g. horticultural cadets through the
industry training organisation (ITa) .
9.9 Economic indicators
There are three core areas to consider in an economic assessment, all of which can have a
major impact on any future, or change of, land use; industry, internal and external
economic factors . The economic assessment follows the norm for any business approach to
a change in core business activity and can be achieved relatively simply . The use of PEST
(political, economic, social and technological) or SWOT (strengths, weaknesses,
20 1
opportunities and threats) analyses are simple tools to contribute to any economic review.
Identifying the internal and external economic factors is important for managers to be able
to respond appropriately to them. A SWOT analysis is a simple tool to help achieve this
distinction with strengths and weaknesses targeting internal factors and opportunities and
threats targeting the external ones.
1 . Industry - within any industry, and this is especially pertinent to the primary industries
such as horticulture, there will be established policy aligned to the industry identifying
the status and strategy of key areas that will impact on future participants in the
industry. These may include; political positioning e .g . in bioprotection; research and
development priorities; employment; technological directions and so on.
2 . Internal - a range of internal economic factors (including the fmancial position of the
land owners) will impact on any consideration for land use. These may include;
ownership structures applied to the land resource or other capital items, ability to access
finance, skills and experience levels and wil l ingness of individuals to contribute,
condition and value of resources, and any cultural factors which might impact on it.
3 . External - there will always b e factors beyond the control o f the landowners which will
impact on future land use options. Some of these factors will include national and
regional policy e .g . government or territorial authority policy directions, markets - both
onshore and offshore (local and export) , prices paid by consumers, access to, and
quality of, services including technical advice, location (both strengths and constraints)
and education.
It is important to consider that all these assessment fields have the abil i ty to contribute
positively to the decision criteria land owners will consider with a view to the assessment
of land use opportunities . In many decision systems the decis ion criteria focus on
identifying negative factors and understanding the limitations each criterion can operate
under rather than the positive contribution they can make. This mindset needs to be
challenged and the assessment process bui lt on identifying the positive factors present
within any group and their aligned resource. By understanding the positive factors the
landowners can grow them to benefit their economic situation overal l .
202
Physical
Assessment
o
o
D
n
Capital
Assessment
o
D
n
o
Cultural
Assessment
•
Economic
Assessment
o
•
o
CJ
D
n I
Figure 9 .3 : Visual representation of data collection within model
203
9.10 Chapter summary
The Maori resource assessment model presented has been created from both the
contemporary assessment tools currently applied to horticultural land use in New Zealand
and the matauranga or body of traditional knowledge existing for Maori around
horticulture, soils or land and land use. The cultural component is formulated using the
matauranga identified in this thesis aligned to three areas; whakapapa and the values
aligned to it, pedological knowledge and horticultural knowledge.
By presenting the model in four configurations it can be viewed from different perspectives
and therefore sustain its credibility from various points of view. The diagrammatic
representation of the assessment factors (Figure 9 . 1 ) puts the key points in a systematic
format indicating their relationship and effect on each other. A further breakdown of the
information is provided in the table that identifies the critical assessment fields, subfields &
indicators (Table 9 . 1 ) supported by another breakdown of cultural indicators (Table 9 .2)
which gives more specific information for implementation. Lastly, the implementation
pathway (Figure 9 .2) is an example of a visual representation for lay-people which gives
another dimension to the overall process of assessment and is intended to simplify the
information into a single visual presentation. The model is ready for application and could
be applied, for example, on the case study at Parewahawaha. Here the land under
assessment is clearly identified both physically and culturally and assessments undertaken
for the study have already identified the characteristics of the resources. Based on the
summary facts (pg 1 84) the block would be suitable for initiation into taewa production or a
similar cropping opportunity with some clear management criteria also apparent.
The crux of the assessment process is the quality of information used to support the
assessment of Maori resources, especially from the cultural perspective. The preceding
chapters which have looked at the Maori cultural paradigm, traditional horticulture,
traditional pedology, and various decision systems have been purposefully constructed to
act as contributors to the assessment model and to highlight the diversity and quality of
information which land managers will have at their disposal. This cultural factor alongside
the physical, capital and economic factors will add considerable value to the process of
Maori land assessment and utility in the future.
204
Chapter 10 : Discussion
10 .1 Introduction
Models are ultilnately a simplification of information drawn from paradigms or larger
bodies of knowledge that allow for the examination of relationships between factors
(Hoover & Donovan, 200 1 ) . The model presented is drawn from the broad knowledge
bases al igned to Maori specific or traditional knowledge related to horticulture and soils
management. It i s then integrated with scientific knowledge through physical assessments
and complemented from an economic perspective through the capital and economic
focussed assessment criteria. The result or output is a determination related to land use or
crop choice that is acceptable to both the cultural and scientific paradigms landowners
would ordinari ly have access to .
10.2 Maori knowledge
New Zealand society has not looked to Maori as contributors to either horticulture or
pedology in any serious way . Neither have Maori looked to these disciplines as their
strength in any scientific representation of tradit ional knowledge. The review of these
disciplines provided in the preceding chapters should help to dispel this incongruity and put
in motion the role of Maori knowledge as a contributor to the future management of Maori
resources and especially horticultural systems in a cultural ly acceptable way.
Maori are in a position to argue their body of knowledge as a broad representation of
traditional horticultural and ethnopedological knowledge. I t is not a new body of
knowledge, just one that has been marginalised from public scrutiny for a number of
reasons, not least colonisation, social impacts since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi ,
and the move away from a traditionally rural environment to urban l iving for most Maori .
Unti l now there has not been any opportunity to look to the traditional relationship between
Maori and the soi ls resource as a contributor to the utility of the resource in the economic
production of horticultural crops . S imilarly, until recent years, most traditional crops
grown in a Maori horticultural environment had been produced aside from the mainstream
horticultural industry and had not been subj ected to any scrutiny by scientists. That
205
lon IS changing and the research i ndustry is looking lTIOre and more at Maori
ledge and Maorl crops and foods as opportun ities for research . Within New Zealand
;tablishment of Maori business managers at the majority of the Crown Research
Ites and various funding agencies such as FRST (Foundation for Research, Science
Technology) and regulatory agencies like ERMA (The Environmental Risk
gement Agency) bears testament to this .
lorld-view of any culture is ultimately the basis for the epistemology applied to that
e. Some scientists argue that the supposed differences between local and scientific
ledge should be rejected as a dichotomy. They perceive local knowledge as being
1, non-systematic and holistic compared to scientific knowledge which is seen as
systematic, obj ective and analytical and therefore non-comparable (Oudwater &
n, 2003) . There is an increasing trend however for science to recognise multiple types
)wledge and knowledge appl ication and the discipl ines of ethnoecology, ethnobotany
thnopedology (even including farming-system sustainability) are an example of this
ation of knowledge systems.
"iadic approach of i l lustrating indigenous knowledge as proposed by Toledo ( 1 992) i s
: format for presenting this knowledge at a level of comprehension acceptable to both
ndigenous and scientific communities. By also recognising the inextricable
mship between the three criteria - Kosmos, Corpus and Praxis - those accessing this
ledge are aware of the differences between the communities and the paradigms they
under in the day-to-day application of their disciplines . The triadic criteria have
led a consistent approach to identifying and discussing the knowledge relevant to
. pedological, horticultural and land management systems and thus for modell ing
ses .
Ylaori and horticulture
�ulture, Maori were traditionally l iving in a subsistence economy and heavily reliant
op production by horticultural systems for survival . The gamut of horticulture
led from land management systems, crop production for food and utilitarian uses, pest
206
and disease management, plant nutrition, harvest and postharvest systems, trading and
hospital ity opportunities, to production of seedlings and cuttings for future production. The
knowledge base which evolved around the application of traditional horticulture for Maori
was extensive and often highly specific to locations, groups, seasons, potential outputs and
product uses . The skil l of pre-European Maori horticulturists in adapting primarily tropical
crops to a temperate c limate on their arrival in New Zealand has also been acknowledged
by a large number of publ ished scientists and authors . Furthermore, they also appl ied their
horticultural skills to the husbandry of new plants and crops drawn from the endemic plants
of New Zealand. This skil l represents an acute understanding of crop physiology and needs
alongside an acute knowledge of the resources available to the manager, knowledge that is
fine tuned even further as each successive crop or management process is applied or new
crops introduced. Chapter six provides an introduction to the broad nature of traditional
Maori horticultural .
Traditional horticulture is also recognised for the holistic nature of the systems appl ied in
Inanagement of natural resources and the potential impact of any dec isions on other
elements of Maori society . In that regard Maori have developed highly sustainable systems
over time, suited to their communities, popuiation ana demands on the resources. The
creation and application of specialist cropping and soils knowledge supported by cultural
tools such as the maramataka (Maori calendar) is evidence of this . Ultimately this
knowledge is practised and retained as t ikanga.
Tikanga as it was appl ied to traditional horticulture has been hugely influenced by the
process of colonisation and the introduction of new economic processes. The introduction
of new crops, pests and diseases, tools, markets, and more recently, technological advances,
has impacted tremendously on traditional knowledge and systems. As well , most of the
exponents of traditional horticul ture have passed on and we now have a generation of
Maori with different relationships and understandings of the resources and processes of
horticulture . From this s ituation arises the need to create land assessment tools which
satisfy both the cultural and scientific needs of contemporary horticulture .
207
10.4 Maori and soils
Barrera-Bassols & Zinck (2002) identified a number of research aims in their review of the
discipline of ethnopedology. Aside from the capture of indigenous knowledge and
behaviours aligned to the pedology discipline, they noted that a significant number of
projects looked to the ' co-validation of ethnopedological knowledge, abilities and skills
with modern soil science, geopedological survey, agroecological strategies, agricultural
and other rural practices, to promote participatory land evaluation and land use planning
procedures for endogenous sustainable development' (ibid :6) . Furthermore they noted that
many indigenous groups have created their own land evaluation systems for agricultural
purposes, generally requiring a sophisticated micro-environmental knowledge, and often
more accurate than technical recommendations. This latter observation alone gives a level
of credibi l i ty to indigenous evaluation systems however, the integration of both knowledge
sources (indigenous and western) is deemed a 'promising new stream of research and
application ' (ibid:9) . The model proposed in this thesis contributes yet another system to
the existing l ibrary of indigenous evaluation systems but ostensibly the first 'Maori system'
focussed on soil resources.
A variation to this approach of integrating knowledge systems is inherent in the belief that
in spite of any limitations that local knowledge systems aligned to soils (or horticulture)
might have, the local taxonomies and linguistics provide information useful for
understanding landscapes and can contribute to improving soil science classifications and
mapping (Krasi lnikov & Tabor, 2003) . Over recent decades considerable indigenous
knowledge, especially Maori, has been lost and the disconnection between folk and
scientific soil management decision criteria has often wasted resources and affected the
community ' s economic opportunities . The information drawn together in chapter four,
especially the Maori soils nomenclature in Tables 4. 1 , 4 .2 . and 4.3 , is partly an attempt to
recapture some traditional Maori knowledge that has been overlooked in recent years .
There are difficulties in expressly applying ethnopedology in soil surveys because of the
l imitations with the localisation of knowledge and variability between members of a
community (Tabor, 2006). One of the benefits however is the common means it provides
208
for a community to interact with pedologists (ibid) . Barri os et af. (2002) applied a
participatory approach with a selection of Latin AInerican and Caribbean comlTIunities to
identify and classify local indicators of soil qual ity related to permanent and modifiable soil
properties which they then formulated into a tool to capture local demands and perceptions
of soil constraints and management approaches. A core component of the tool is the level
and qual ity of communication between technical officers and farmers or land owners, seen
as having perhaps the most potential in their model to facil itate farmer consensus about soil
related constraints to their [proposed] production systelns. The interaction between
technicians and experts and the Maori community is equally rel evant to that of other
indigenous communities.
Barrios et af. (2002) appl ied only soil quality factors in their model for indigenous farmers
stating also that 'the indicators are identified from local and technical knowledge base and
critical [ qual i ty] level defined. (p60 1 .3 ) . They continue by identifying thi s as an integrative
approach between technological and indigenous systems and that agreement is sought from
all part ies before any qual ity factors become accepted as a final qual i ty diagnostic tool .
Soil resources are constantly being assessed for many and varied uses . Pressure trom the
community to benefit from the use or development of soils is mounting however our
demands are changing. The concept of working with soil quality factors has become
increasingly apparent as we recognise that sustainable management means more than just
erosion control (Karlen et af. 2003) . The Maori land resource is possibly the largest
untapped resource in the primary sector of New Zealand and with i t lies the opportunity to
contribute to future national and Maori economic development . For owners to want to bring
th is land into development or look to alternative opportunities on already developed Maori
land, it is important that the cultural aspect of their relationship to the resource is
recognised and respected.
10.5 Cultural assessment
This cultural assessment model for Maori land resources looks to a range of cultural
indicators, not just a set of soil or crop specific ones. Based on the holistic interpretation of
209
any affi l iat ion to land by Maori , i t is impoliant to acknowledge the re lationship that exists
and the Inatauranga that has developed as a re ul t . The cultural indicators which are the
basis of the model build on unique Maori re lationships with the land resource and
contribute to the quality and knowledge of the re ource overall . Expressions of values and
cultural factors such as mauri and whakapapa are definitive of the Maori knowledge around
the land resource .
In some instances traditional knowledge merely informs the scientific community rather
than integrates with it. It is important for Maori, especially in the context of rangatiratanga,
that matauranga Maori is a positive contribution to science, especially disciplines with
which there is an obvious affinity such as horticulture and pedology. Therefore,
matauranga Maori is better represented through processes that encourage integration rather
than being just informative in a secondary way to research.
1 0. 5. 1 Decision processes
The proposed cultural assessment model follows the trend of the 1 0 step decision making
process (Boehlj e & Eidman, 1 984) in that the cultural assessment al igns to steps 1 and 2
(goals and obj ectives and problem definition) because the cultural factor needs to be
considered at the point of determining the need for a decision. This is followed by the
physical , capital and economic assessments in steps 3 -6 and the implementation and review
in steps 7- 1 0 . The following table (Table 1 0 . 1 ) indicates the relationship between the two
models .
The outcomes of the assessment need to be applied to a decision matrix designed for the
level of output under consideration and to meet the success cri teria landowners will apply.
Some horticultural options will be lower risk than others, for example the investment cost
in perennial production is considerably higher than for annual production of most vegetable
crops .. S imilarly, the key indicators of success for some landowners may vary; some may
focus on financial returns, others on capital value or people (social) development. For these
reasons, the final criteria to be applied to the decision matrix needs to be determined by the
landowners with appropriate advice from cultural , technical and business experts.
2 1 0
Table 1 0 . 1 : Comparison of decis ion processes after Boehlje & Eidman ( 1 984)
Step Decision process
(Boehlje & Eidman, 1984) Maori resource assessment model
1 Formulation of goals & objectives } 2 Problem recognition & definition Cultural assessm,ent; kosmos/corplls/praxis
3 Collection of information } 4 Specification of alternatives Physical & capital assessments
5 Evaluation of technical feasibility
6 Financial evaluation Economic assessment
7 Choice of an alternative Outcome of assessment
8 Implementing decision } 9 Bearing responsibility Subsequent processes to assessment
10 Evaluating outcome
From a conceptual approach to management and decision criteria, it is apparent the model
is al so valid through alignment to accepted management processes. This further val idates
the role of a cultural model in land assessment for Maori landowners and how the model
will contribute to economic development over time.
The case studies undertaken with Wakatu Inc . , Ngati Parewahawaha hapil and Tahuri
Whenua all highl ight the relationship and presence and extent of Maori knowledge al igned
to the land resource and horticultural activities, thus complementing the argument about the
positive role of Maori values and culture in the consideration of any change of land use and
contemporary land management. By using the kosmos/ corpus/ praxis maxim promoted in
the discipline of ethnopedology, matauranga Maori is consistently identified for the value it
adds to the management of the resource and also the decision processes applied by the
managers . Each of the case studies identified the capabil i ty of the land owners to undertake
a change in land use to horticultural production in the present time.
In considering the three case studies, each represented a different stratum of Maori
association to land and land uti l ity . The p rimary point of difference is in the management
structure appl ied to the production systelTI. Wakatu Incorporation represents a considerable
2 1 1
number of landowners over a diverse portfolio of land, horticulture, fisheries and forestry
resources. Regardless, they still acknowledge the role of Maori values and knowledge in
their business structure and in the management processes they apply. This is supported by
the value statement of FoMA to which Wakatu is a member. Ngati Parewahawaha hapu
trustees also represent a considerable number of people over a diverse range of activities,
all contributing to the well-being of the hapu as a whole. Their business and management
structures are less well defined but clearly indicate the role of whakapapa, tikanga and
values in their implementation. Tahuri Whenua approach horticulture from a pan-tribal
perspective but align to the other structures through their acknowledgement of cultural
factors such as value systems, tikanga and matauranga as central components to their
activities in assisting Maori in returning to horticultural land uses. As participants in the
modem business world, all three case study entities undertake their decision making in a
stnlctured way and are inclusive of a cultural component.
The contribution of a cultural model calculated to align to acknowledged (non-indigenous)
decision support systems models in horticulture and management is a key factor in getting
the model accepted by the wider horticulture industry and Maori community. The
alignment through parallel associations with standard decision making processes and
resource assessment models indicates there is a place for Maori cultural factors to be
included in the assessment and management of Maori land resources through horticulture .
I t therefore supports the hypothesis promoted at the start of this thesis that:
'Miitauranga Miiori relevant to horticulture and pedology can inform and add value to the
ft/ture economic development of land resources. '
10.6 Rangatiratanga
An important factor contributing to this thesis has been the consideration of the status of
' rangatiratanga' for Maori as a result of the research and outcomes. The kaupapa Maori
methodology impl icitly looked to build the capabi lity of Maori as a result of the research
and the proj ect has always been inclusive of this need. The model presented along with the
supporting traditional knowledge base relevant to both soils management and horticulture is
a positive contribution to Maori management of Maori resources and is timely in its
2 1 2
l
avai labi l i ty as more and more people look to sustainable management of resources under an
increasing pressure to make those resources more intensive and productive due to
increasing economic and social expectations.
The marginalisation of Maori and Maori knowledge in contemporary science and resource
management systems has always frustrated Maori managers of natural resources. Maori are
regularly expected to stand in non-Maori s i tuat ions and justify their position because of the
perce ived dichotomy i t has with science practit ioners85 . Research such as this that looks to
validate Maori knowledge with a view to acknowledged integrity assists the role of all
Maori in resource management areas and thus assists the rangatiratanga determination for
Maori as a culture.
The recognition of a body of traditional Maori knowledge that has the abi l i ty to contribute
to scientific disciplines, in this case horticulture and pedology or soil science is a posit ive
step for Maori in these fields. It is also t imely for many Maori for a number of reasons;
much of the old or traditional knowledge is being lost as the generation of elders with first
hand experience of the knowledge dies out and, the resurgence of a Maori identity through
the acknowiedgement of the Treaty of Waitangi , Waitangi Tribunal and inclusion in
legislative processes requires the Maori communi ty to build their capabi li ty to become
participants on an equal footing with non-Maori . This knowledge therefore contributes to
policy, education and science and is a potential contributor to the national economic good.
85 Personal Communication, Pita Richardson, Iwi representative on Environment Court, 16 February 2007.
2 1 3
10.7 Chapter summary
The contribution of ll1atauranga Maori and contemporary knowledge to an assessment or
decision system which supports Maori economic uti l i ty of the land resource is a whol ly
positive action . The abi l i ty to draw from a body of knowledge not previously included in
dec ision models relative to land uti l ity in New Zealand is a key point of difference with the
model presented in this thesis. The preceding chapters have establi shed the extent and
quantity of traditional knowledge surrounding Maori horticultural and soil management
activities . The case studies with three distinctive Maori entities supports this knowledge
base and provides good examples of the role of a land assessment model in contemporary
Maori society and as an inclusive asseSSlnent process which can contribute to al l sectors of
New Zealand society. I t is also ilnportant to recognise the rangatiratanga of Maori as a
col lective body of iwi, hapu and whanau throughout the research undertaken for this thesis
and recognise the contribution the output makes to tino rangatiratanga 0 nga iwi katoa.
2 14
Conclusion
The future management of Maori resources will become increasingly difficult as ownership
structures become more complicated and the value set of landowners becomes increasingly
diverse as a response to the pot-pourri of cultures that will contribute to the parentage of
our future generations. The pressures from the wider community for an improved and
responsible economic use of land resources will also impinge on future management of
these resources by Maori . To have access to structured tools for assessing and managing
land resources is but one way of the present generation contributing to the future
generations of Maori . Resource assessment models such as the one presented will always
be open to interpretation and refmement and as such can be considered as being dynamic
and responsive to their environment just as tikanga is within the Maori cultural
environment.
Maori society is unique among societies because of its world-view which acts as a basis for
the culture, itself a response to the environment in which the people exist and the processes
they undertake to manage the envirofl111clTi: fOf survival . Horticulture has been a key
component of traditional l ife for Maori as it contributed to the rather limited food-store
avai lab le to them prior to the introduction of fruits, vegetables , grains and l ivestock through
colonisation in the early nineteenth century. The traditional knowledge that was the
practice of horticulture in those times included the knowledge surrounding the land and
water resources which supported the crop systems aligned to both food and uti lity crops .
This specialist knowledge was held by tohunga or people with specialist roles within the
community to ensure it was managed and used appropriately to guarantee the continued
survival of the group .
The study of ethnopedology, defined as the study of ' local ' knowledge of soil and land
management [pedology] in an ecological perspective has not previously been undertaken
within the Maori cultural paradigm. It has been app lied to a number of other indigenous
cultures and the simi larity in the range and value of soils specific knowledge with Maori
2 1 5
k n o w l e d g e is e x c i t i n g . By r e v I e w I n g t h i s ' l o c a l ' kn o w l e d g e u S I n g a t r i a d i c
k o s m o s / c o rp u s / p r a x i s a p p r o a c h , t h e i n d i g e n o u s e l e m e n t h a s b e e n a p p r o p r i a t e l y i n c l u d e d .
T h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y r e l e v a n t fo r M a o r i w h o s o m e t i m e s s t ru g g l e t o c o m m u n i c a t e t h e c u l t u r a l
e l e m e n t of t r a d i t i o n a l k n o w l e d g e or m a n ag e m e n t t o o t h e r s e c t o r s , e s p e c i a l l y s c i e n c e .
W h e r e k o s m o s i s a p p l i e d a s Te A o Ma o r i , c o rp u s a s m a t a u ranga Ma o r i a n d p r a x i s a s
tikanga Maori, the relationship between each element is c lear and the interpretation of the
associated knowledge becomes more apparent.
This thesis has introduced elements of the tradit ional knowledge aligned to horticulture in
Maori society, inclusive of value systems underp inning Maori society, specialist soi ls and
crops knowledge, decis ion support systems for horticultural land use, and economic
impacts on Maori s ince colonisation. All these components of knowledge have been
provided to support the argument that Maori have a body of knowledge which can
contribute to science, resource management and ult imately the economic development and
sustainabi l i ty of Maori resources. The identified knowledge has been garnered to
contribute to an assessment model for Maori resources looking to a change in land use
through hort iculture.
The case studies undertaken have given the opportunity to app ly the triadic assessment
process with a view to achieving a specific land-use (annual horticultural crop production
system based on taewa crop) . Each case study has presented a different enti ty s tructure and
relationship to the land resource and thus highl ighted the divers i ty within the Maori
communi ty with regard to land management and the potential contribution Maori can make
to the economic future of this country. The cultural factors identified within, and as a result
of, the case studies have contributed in a generic sense to the assessment model .
The Maori resource assessment model presented within th is thesis i s based on an analogy of
Y=f(xJ , X2, x] , . . . . xn) where Y i s the assessment decision or output and i s a function (f) of
four critical factors (X l to X4) ; cultural , physical, cap ital and economic. The model bui lds
on conventional assessment systems within the horticultural sector with an emphasis placed
on elaborating and cri tiquing the newly identified cultural factor which overlays the
2 1 6
remammg factors. The cul tural assessment factor has been broken down into thirteen
distinctive cui tural i ndicators, a l l supported by the matauranga (traditional knowledge)
presented in the preceding chapters on traditional horticulture and soil management systems
and case studies. The case studies were selected because they could provide support ing
evidence of the ro le of cu I tural values and value systelns in the assessment of Maori
resources for horticultural land use within a range of land ownership structures.
The key then has been to present the Maori land asseSSlnent model in a form that bui lds on
conventional assessment processes and is acceptable to the various interests, or stakeholder,
groups e .g . science or Maori cOlwnunities and that can be appl ied appropriately. The
model in i ts present form is now ready for appl ication by Maori land owners with a view to
a change in land-use. Only in i ts continued application will the cultural evaluation model
continue to evolve and contribute to the rangatiratanga of Maori as a community .
The following whakatauaki is an appropriate conclusion to this thesi s and acknowledges the
matauranga discussed and appl ied in the preceding chapters .
Kia mau ki te kura whero.
Kei mau koe ki te kura tawhiwhi kei waiho koe
Rei whakamomona mo te whenua tangata.
Hold fast to the valued treasure.
Not to the i l lusory treasure lest you be left as fert i l iser for the human land.
( In other words : that which is of real high value should be securely retained
Translation as given in Mead & Grove, 200 1 )
2 1 7
References
Adams, G. R. & Schvaneveldt, J . D. , 1 99 1 : Understanding research methods, Longman
Publishing Group, New York, USA. 405pp.
Allen, H; Johns, D ; Phi llips, C; Day, K; O ' Brien, T. & Ngati Mutunga. , 2002 : Wahi ngaro
(the lost portion) : strengthening relationships between people and wetlands in North
Taranaki, New Zealand, in, World Archaeology, 34(2) : 3 1 5 -329
Allen, R . E . (Ed.), [ 1 990] : The concise Oxford dictionary of current English (8 th edition) ,
Oxford University Press, England. 1 454pp .
Andersen, 1 . C . , 1 926 : Popular names of New Zealand p lants, in, Transactions of the NZ
Institute, 56 : 659-7 1 4
Anderson, A . , 1 998 : The welcome of strangers, Publ . University ofOtago Press. 249pp .
Anderson, Dr R. & Pickens, K. , 1 996 : Rangahaua Whanui District 12: Wellington District:
Port Nicholson, Hutt Valley, Porirua, Rangitikei, and Manawatu, Waitangi Tribunal,
Wellington. 3 35pp
Anon, 1 923 : Note on Maori compost, in, Journal of Polynesian Society, 32(2) : 93
Anon, 1 93 1 : Kaiapohia Pa centenary, Publ . The Printing & General Agency, Christchurch .
36pp
Anon, 1 952 : Maori small farming to be assisted, in, Te Ao Hou, Vol 1 , Winter 1 952 . pp40-
4 1
Anon, 1 954: Puha i n Greece, in, Te A o Hou, Vol 7 , Winter 1 954, p62.
Anon, 2006 : Te Papakupu 0 te Taitokerau (Working draft), Taitokerau SDR Group .
Arapere, B . R. , 1 999: 'Mako ano hei hanga i toku nei whare ': hapii dynamics in the
Rangitikei area 1830-1872, Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Auckland. 1 68pp.
AREDS, 2002 : Maori Economic Development: te huarahi pai, a future pathway,
unpublished report, Auckland Regional Economic Development S trategy, Auckland.
Ashwell, H. F . , 1 999 : Te reo Maori me kapapaha 0 f 'iwi Rakiura ma Wai Urua i te heke
hao kai i ka ra kua pahure, Univ. of Otago Wildlife Mgt Rpt 1 1 6 , Univ. of Otago. 3 5pp.
Aston, B. C., 1 9 1 0 : The pakihi soils of West land, in, The Journal of the Department of
Agriculture, 1 ( 1 ) :22-27
2 1 8
Barber, 1 . G., 1 984: Prehistoric wetland cultivation in far-Northern Aotearoa: an
archaeological investigation, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Auckland. 288pp .
Barber, 1 . G., 1 989 : Of boundaries, drains and crops : a classification system for traditional
Maori horticultural ditches, in, NZ Journal of Archaeology, 1 1 : 23 -50
Barlow, C . , [2002] : Tikanga whakaaro: key concepts in Maori culture, Oxford University
Press, Melbourne, Australia. 1 87pp
Barratt, G., 1 979 : Bellingshausen - a visit to New Zealand: 1820, The Dunmore Press,
Palmerston North. 1 83pp
Barratt, G, 1 988 : Volume 2 of Russia and the South Pacific 1696-1840: Southern and
Eastern Polynesia, Univ. of British Columbia Press, USA. 302pp .
Barrera-Bassols, N . & Zinck, A. , 2002 : Ethnopedological research: a worldwide review,
Paper 590 presented to Symposium 1 5 , 1 ih World Congress of Soil Science, Thailand, 1 4-
2 1 August 2002.
Barrera-Bassols, N . & Zinck, A. , 2003 : Ethnopedology: a worldwide review on the soil
knowledge of local people, in, Geoderma, 1 1 1 (3 -4) : 1 7 1 - 1 95 .
Barrios, E ; Delve, R . J ; Trejo, M . T . & Thomas, R . 1 . , 2002 : Integration of local soil
knowledge for improved soil management strategies, Paper 60 1 presented to Symposium
3 1 , 1 ih World Congress of Soil Science, Thailand, 1 4-2 1 August 2002 .
Baskin, Y. , 2006 : Slash and char improves Amazonian soil , in, BioScience, 56(4) : 368
Bassett, K. N; Gordon, H . W; Nobes, D. C. & Jacomb, C . , 2004 : Gardening at the edge:
documenting the l imits of tropical Polynesian kiimara horticulture in southern New
Zealand, in, Geoarchaeology, 1 9(3) : 1 85 -2 1 8 .
Beattie, 1. H . , 1 949 : The Maoris and Fiordland, Otago Daily Times, Dunedin. 1 04pp.
Beckett, P . , 1 95 3 : Notes & queries [on timanga] , in, Journal of the Polynesian Society,
62 :4 1 3
Beever, 1 . , 1 98 1 : A map o f the pre-European vegetation o f the Lower Northland, New
Zealand, in, NZ Journal of Botany, 1 9 : 1 05 - 1 1 0 .
Beever, 1 . , 1 99 1 : A dictionary of Miiori plant names, Publ . Auckland Botanical Society,
75pp
Beever, R. E . , 2002 : Cabbage tree sudden decl ine, in, He korero korari, 1 2 : 1 3
2 1 9
Beever, R. E; Forster, R. L. S ; Rees-George, J; Robertson, G. I; Wood, G. A. & Winks, C .
J . , 1 996 : Sudden decline of the cabbage tree (Cordyline australis) : search for the cause, in,
NZ Journal of Ecology, 20( 1 ) : 53 -68
Begg, A. C . & Begg, N. C . , 1 969 : James Cook & New Zealand, Govt Printer, Well ington
1 7 1 pp .
Benbrook, C . M . , 1 99 1 : Natural resources assessment and policy, in , Soil managementfor
sustainability (Eds : Lal, R., & Pierce, F. J) , Pub! . Soil & Water Cons . Soc. Iowa, USA.
pp 1 45- 1 66
Benjamin, C . , 1 997 : Biopiracy and native knowledge, in, Native Americas: Akwe:kon 's
Journal of Indigenous Issues, 1 4(2) :22-3 1
Bergin, D . O . & Herbert, J. W. , 1 998 : Pingao on coastal sand dunes, Publ, NZFRI,
Rotorua. 20pp .
Berl in, B . , 1 992 : Ethnobiological classification; principles of categorization of plants and
animals in traditional societies, Publ . Princeton Universi ty Press, New Jersey, USA. 335pp
Berridge, W. C . , 1 9 1 3 : Kumeras, or sweet potatoes, in, The Jour. of Agr. , 7 :4 1 5-4 1 9
Berridge, W . C . , 1 9 1 4: Kumeras, or sweet potatoes(2), in, The Jour. of Agr. , 9 :280-283
Best, E . , 1 898 : C lothing of the ancient Maori , in , Transactions of the NZ Inst. 3 1 : 625-658
Best, E . , 1 902 : Food products of Tuhoeland, in, Transactions of the NZ Inst. 3 5 :45- 1 1 1
Best, E . , 1 908 : Maori Forest Lore, in, Transactions of the NZ Institute, 4 1 :23 1 -286
Best, E . , 1 922 : The taro (Colocasia antiquorum), in , The NZ Jour. Sci. & Tech. 5 :204-205
Best, E . , 1 974: Maori storehouses and their kindred stnlctures, Dominion Museum
Bulletin 5 , Govt Printer, Well ington. (Reprint, repaginated but without textual alteration, of
1 9 1 6 edition) . 1 1 6pp .
Best, E. , 1 976 : Maori agriculture, Dominion Museum Bulletin 9, Govt Printer, Well ington.
(Reprint, repaginated but without textual alteration, of 1 925 edition) . 3 1 5pp.
Best, E. , 1 977 : Forest lore of the Maori, Dominion Museum Bul letin 1 4, Govt Printer,
Wellington . (Reprint, repaginated but without textual alteration, of 1 942 edition) . 420pp.
Best, E., [ 1 986] : The Maori division of time, Dominion Museum Monograph #4, Govt
Printer, Wellington. 54pp .
220
Best, E . , 1 995 : J..1iiori religion and mythology: Part i , Dominion Museum Bulletin 1 0,
Museum of New Zeal and, Wel l ington . (Repri nt, repaginated but without textual alteration,
of 1 924 edit ion) . 424pp.
Best, E. , 1 995a: Miiori religion and mythology: Part 2, Dominion Museum Bulletin 1 1 ,
Museum of New Zealand, Wellington . (Reprint, repaginated but wi thout textual alteration,
of 1 982 edition) . 682 pp.
Best, E . , 1 995b: The pii Moori, Dominion MuseUln Bulletin 6, Museum of New Zealand,
Well ington. (Reprint, repaginated but without textual alteration, of 1 927 edition) . 459 pp.
Bevan-Brown, J. , 1 998 : By Maori, for Maor} , about Maori - is that enough? in,
Proceedings Te Oru Rangahau Moori Research & Development Conference, Massey
University, pp23 1 -45
Binney, 1., 1 987 : Maori oral narratives : Pakeha wri tten texts - two fonns of telling history,
in, NZ Journal of History, 2 1 : 1 6-28
B ishop, L . , 1 903 : A note on the composition of a Maori compost from Taranaki, in,
Journal of the Polynesian Society, 3 3 : 3 1 7-320
B ishop, A. R. , 1 996 : Collaborative research stories,· whakawhanaungatanga. The
Dunmore Press, Palmerston North. 274pp
Boast, R . , 1 997 : Ngoti Toa in the Wellington region: a report to the Waitangi Tribunal,
Pub! . The Waitangi Tribunal , Well ington. 2 1 3pp.
BoehUe, M. D . & Eidman, V. R. , 1 984: Farm management, Wiley Publ . New York, USA.
806pp.
Brade-Birks, S . G (Dr) . , 1 962 : Go soil, The English Universities Press, London, 304pp.
Briggs, J ; Pulford, 1 . D; Badri, M. & Shaheen, A. S . , 1 998 : Indigenous and scientific
knowledge: the choice and management of cultivation sites by Bedouin in Upper Egypt, in,
Soil Use and Management, 1 4 :240-245 .
Brook, F . J. & McArdle, B . H . , 1 999 : Morphological variation, biogeography and local
extinction of the northern New Zealand 1andsnail Placostylus hongii (Gastropoda:
Bulimulidae) , in, Journal of the Royal Soc. of NZ, 29(4) :407-434
Broughton, R., 1 979 : The origins ofNgo Rauru Kltahi, Victoria University, Wellington.
63pp .
Brownsley, P. , 200 1 : Ferns; the glory of the forest, in, NZ Geographic, 49 :64-83
Buchanan, 1., 1 876 : On the root-stock of Marattiafraxinea Smith, in, Transactions and
Proceedings of the Royal Society of NZ, 9 : 527-529
22 1
Buchanan, J. D. H . , 1 973 : The Miiori history and place names ofHawke )s Bay) AB & AW
Reed Publ . Wel l ington. 2 1 5pp .
Buck, P . H (Te Rangihiroa) . , 1 923 : Maori p lai ted basketry and plaitwork: 1 , mats, baskets
and burden carriers, in, Transactions of NZ Institute, 54:705-742
Buck, P. H (Te Rangihiroa) . , 1 924: Maori plaited basketry and plaitwork: 2, belts & bands,
fire fans and fly-flaps, sandals and sai ls, in, Transactions of NZ Institute, 55 : 344-362
Buck, P. H (Te Rangihiroa) . , 1 949 : The coming of the Miiori) Publ . Whitcombe & Tombs
Ltd, Christchurch. 55 1 pp.
Buck, P . H (Te Rangihiroa) . , 1 954: Vikings of the sunrise, Publ . Whitcombe & Tombs Ltd,
Christchurch. 339pp.
Buol, S. W; Hole, F. D. & McCracken, R. J . , 1 973 : Soil genesis and classification, The
Iowa State University Press, Iowa, USA. 360pp.
Bums, R B . , 2000: Introduction to Research Methods (4th edition) , Longman Publ .
Melbourne, Australia. 6 1 3pp.
Burtenshaw, M. K. , 1 999 : Maori gourds : an American connection? in, Journal of the
Polynesian Society, 1 08(4) :427-433 .
Butterworth, G . V . & Butterworth, S M. , 1 995 : The MClOri Trustee) Publ . The Maori
Trustee, Wel lington. 1 72pp .
Cameron, R. J . , 1 964: Destruction of the indigenous forests for Maori agriculture during the
Nineteenth Century, in, NZ Journal of Forestry, 9 : 87- 1 1 4
Campbell , I . B . , 1 978 : Soils of the Rangitikei County) North Island) New Zealand, NZ Soil
Survey Report 3 8, NZ Soil Bureau, DSIR, Well ington. 3 7pp.
Challis, A. J . , 1 976 : Physical and chemical examination of a Maori gravel soil near
Motueka, New Zealand, in, NZ Jour. of Science, 1 9 : 249-254.
Chalmers, A F . , 1 999 : What is this thing called science? Open Univ. Press, Australia.
266pp.
Chalmers, R., 1 992 : Rural appraisal,· rapid, relaxed and participatory, lnst. of
Development Studies Discussion paper 3 1 1 , USA.
Chapoulie, J-M. , 1 987 : Everett C Hughes and the development of fieldwork in sociology,
in, Urban Life (Journal of Contemporary Ethnography)) 1 5 (3 -4) :259-298 .
222
Cheeseman, T. F . , [ 1 923 ] : j'vfanual of the New Zealand Flora, Govt Printer, Wellington.
1 1 63pp
Chinnock, R. J . , [ 1 999] : The Reed handbook of common New Zealandferns andfern allies,
Reed Publ ishing NZ Ltd, Auckland. 75pp.
Chittenden, E . T; Hodgson, L . & Dodson, K. J . , 1 966 : Soils and agriculture of Waimea
County, New Zealand, Soil Bureau Bulletin 30 , DSIR, Wel lington. 66pp .
Clark, A . H . , 1 949: The invasion of New Zealand by people, plants and animals: the South
Island, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, USA. 465pp.
C larke, A. C . , 2006 : Origins and Dispersal of the Polynesian Bottle Gourd, in, The Allan
Wilson Centre Newsletter, Issue 4, September 2006. pp 1 -3
Clarke, A. C ; Burtenshaw, M. K; McLenachan, P . A; Erickson, D . L. & Penny, D . , 2006:
Reconstructing the origins and dispersal of the Polynesian bottle gourd (Lagenaria
siceraria) in, Mo!. Bio!. Eco!. 23(5) : 893 -900
Cody, J . F . , 1 956 : 28 (Maori) Battalion, Publ . Historical Publ . Branch, Wel lington. 505pp
Coffll, A. N . , 2007 : Nga kupu Maori mo nga wahi tiipuna, wahi tapu me nga wahi taonga:
Maori terminology for places of significance, in, Archaeology in NZ, 50( 1 ) :43-56
Coleman, B. P . , 1 969 : The h istory of the Owairaka Red kUmara, in, NZ Commercial
Grower, 25(7) :2 1
Coleman, B . P . , 1 972 : Kfimara growing, NZ Dept. Ag Bulletin No294, Govt Printer. 44pp .
Colenso, W., 1 8 80 : On the vegetab le foods of the ancient New Zealanders before Cook ' s
visit, in, Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand 1 3 : 3 -3 8
Cowan, J . , 1 9 1 0 : The breadfruit tree i n Maori tradition, in, Jour. Polynesian Soc. 1 9 : 94-96
Cowie, 1. D. , 1 978 : Soils and agriculture of Kairanga County, Soi l Bureau Bul letin 33 , NZ
Soil Bureau, DSIR, Wel l ington. 9 1 pp.
Davidson, C. & Tolich, M. (Eds), 2003 : Social science research in New Zealand: many
paths to understanding (2nd ed.), Publ . Pearson Education, Auckland
Davies, J . D . G; Gal loway, L. & Nutt, A. H . C . , 1 994: Waihora, Lake Ellesmere: past,
present, jilture, Lincoln University Press, L incoln, Canterbury. 1 34pp .
Davis, W. C . , 1 96 1 : New Zealand native plant studies, Publ . AH & A W Reed, Wel l ington
323pp .
223
Dawson, J . & Lucas, R., 1 996: New Zealand coast and mountain plants,' their communities
and lifestyles, Victoria University Press , Wel lington. 1 76pp .
de Lisle, 1. F . & Kerr, 1. S . , 1 965 : The climate and weather of the Nelson region, New
Zealand, NZ Meteorological Service Publ . 1 1 5(3) , Well ington. 1 0pp
Duff, R., 1 956 : The evolution of Poly ne si an culture in New Zealand: Moa-hunters, Maoris,
Morioris, in, NZ Science Review, Nov : 1 47- 1 5 1 .
Durie, A. , 1 998 : Me tipu ake te pono : Maori research, ethicality & development, in,
Proceedings Te Oru Rangahau Miiori Research & Development Conference, Massey
University, pp257 -63
Durie, M., 1 994: Whaiora, Miiori health developments, Oxford Univ. Press, Auckland.
244pp.
Durie, M., 1 996: Miiori Science and Miiori development; address to the Faculty of Science,
Massey University. Dept . ofMaori Studies, Massey Universi ty .
Durie, M. , 1 996a: Characteristics of Miiori health research. Paper presented at the Hui
Whakapiripiri, Hongoeka Marae, Pl immerton.
Durie, M. , 1 998 : Te Mana, Te Kawanatanga - the politics of Miiori self determination.
Oxford Universi ty Press, Auckland. 280 pp.
Esler, A. E. , 1 978 : Botany of the Manawatu District, New Zealand, DSIR, Auckland.
206pp.
Ettema, C. H. , 1 994 : Indigenous soil classifications: what is their structure and function
and how do they compare to scientific soil classifications? Downloaded from
http ://www . i tc.nll�rossiter/research/rsrch _ss _ class.html#interp _ ag - 1 December 2006 .
Evans, 1 . , 1 997 : Ngii waka 0 nehera: thefirst voyaging canoes, Reed Publ . Ltd, Auckland.
223pp.
Falconer, R. G. , 1 95 8 : The home garden; supplementary cropping on dairy farms for profit,
in, Te Ao Hou, 24 : 54-55
Fankhauser, B . L. , 1 982 : An experimental umu-tii , in, NZAA Newsletter, 25(2) : 1 32- 1 3 7
Fankhauser, B . L . , 1 986 : An input/output energy analysis of ti i gathering, in, NZAA
Newsletter, 29(4) :230-237
Fankhauser, B . L . , 1 990: The Maori use of t i i (cabbage trees) for food, in, Ngii mahi Miiori
o te wao nui ii Tane (Eds : Harris, W & Kapoor, P) Publ : Botany Division, DSIR,
Christchurch. pp43 -47 .
224
Fankh auser, B . L. & B rasch, D . J . , 1 98 5 : Preparation of high-fructose syrup from the New
Zeal and cabbage tree, Cordyline australis, in, NZ Jour. Technology, 1 ( 1 ) :27-32
Firth, R. , 1 972 : Economics of the New Zealand Maori, Government Printer, Wel lington.
5 1 9pp
Forbes, S: 1 996 : Te Waipunahau - archaeological survey, 1996, Unpublished Report,
Author (Kotuku Consultancy Ltd, Porirua) . 78pp.
Fordyce, L. & MacLehn, K. , 2000 : The Bay: a history of community at Titahi Bay, Publ.
Titahi Bay Residents & Ratepayers Progressive Assn, Well ington.
Frankenberger, T. R. & Coyle, P. E . , 1 993 : Integrating household food security into
farming systems research extension, in, Jour. for Farming Systems Research-Extension,
4( 1 ) : 3 5-66
Furey, L. , 2006: j\1aori gardening: an archaeological perspective, DoC, Wel lington. 1 37pp
Gillard, S . 0., 1 965 : Commercial kiimara cultivation, Bulletin N0294, NZ Dept of
Agriculture, Wellington. 1 2pp .
Gilmour, C . , 1 993 : Conservation Chatham' s style, in, Forest & Bird, 269 :23-8
Given, D. R. & Harris, W. , 1 994: Techniques and methods of ethnobotany, Publ .
Commonwealth Secretariat, United Kingdom. 1 48pp .
Gobin, A; Campling, P ; Deckers, J. & Feyen, J . , 2000: Quantifying soi l morphology in
tropical environments : methods and application in soil c lassification, in, Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
Journal, 64 : 1 423- 1 433
Gourley, G . , 1 996 : Fresh New Zealand veggies: a user 's handbook, Pub l : NZ Vegetable &
Potato Growers Federation Inc . , Wellington. 79pp .
Graham, G. , 1 948 : He kai, he kai (some food for some food), in, Jour. Polynesian Soc.
57 : 64-67
Gregory, K. , 1 976 : Land of streams: life in the Waimea County, Province of Nelson, Publ .
Waimea County Council , Nelson. 1 43pp .
Gumbley, W; Higham, T. F . G. & Low, D. J . , 2004: Prehistoric horticultural adaptation of
soils in the middle Waikato basin : review and evidence from S 14/20 1 & S 1 41 1 85 ,
Hamil ton, in, NZ Journal of Archaeology, 25(2003 ) : 5 -30
Hamel, J; Dufour, S . & Fortin, D . , 1 993 : Case Study Methods, Sage Publ . California. 76pp .
Hamilton, A. , 1 903 : Maori carving on the trunks of karaka trees, in, Transactions of the
New Zealand Institute, 36 : 1 1 - 1 3
225
Hammond, T. G., 1 894 : The kLimara pere i , and taewa, in, Jour. Polynesian Soc, 3 :237-23 8
Hammond, T. G . , 1 924 : The stOlY of Aotea, Publ . Lyttleton Times Co. , Christchurch.
242pp.
Hargreaves, J . , 1 960 : Maori agricul ture after the wars ( 1 87 1 - 1 886), in, Journal of the
Polynesian Society, 69 : 354-367.
Hargreaves, 1 . , 1 963 : Changing Maori agriculture in pre-Waitangi New Zealand, in,
Journal of the Polynesian Society, 72 : 1 0 1 - 1 1 7
Harmsworth, G . R. , 1 995 : Miiori values for land-use planning, ManaakiWhenua Landcare
Research, Palmerston North, 1 1 8pp.
Harris, G. F. , 1 996 : The significance of rengarenga Arthropodium cirratum to Maori, in,
The New Zealand Garden Journal, June : 1 9-2 1
Hanis, G. F . , 2002 : Nga Riwai Maori : the perpetuation of relict potato cul tivars within
Maori communities in New Zealand, i n, International Area Studies Conference VII.
Vegeculture in Eastern Asia & Oceania (Eds Shuj i , Y & Matthews, P), JCAS, Osaka,
Japan, pp303-3 1 7
Harri s, G. F . , 2006 : Te Whakatu Korero. Te Paraiti: the 1905-06 potato blight epidemic in
New Zealand and its effect on Miiori communities, Publ . The Open Polytechnic of NZ,
Lower Hutt, 1 04pp.
Harris, G . F . & Te Whaiti, H . , 1 996 : Rengarenga l i l ies and Maori occupation at Matakitaki
a-Kupe (Cape Palliser) ; an ethnobotanical s tudy, in, Jour. Polynesian Soc. , 1 05(3) :27 1 -285
Haskett, J . D . , 1 995 : The philosophical basis for so i l c lassification and i t s evolution, in , Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. Jour. 59 : 1 79- 1 84
Hauraki Maori Tnlst Board, 1 999 : The Hauraki Strategic Plan, 2021, unpublished report,
author (HMTB), Thames . 1 2pp.
Hauraki Maori Trust Board, 2005 : Strategic blueprint 2006-2012 - building the Hauraki
nation together, Publ : HMTB, Thames, 24pp.
Haverkort, A. J . & MacKerron, D . K. L., 2004 : Role of decis ion support systems in potato
production, in, Decision support systems in potato production: bringing models to practice,
Wageningen Academic Publishers, The Netherlands. 238pp.
Hayashi, K. & Wakatsuki , T. , 2002: Sustainable soilfertility management by indigenous
and scientific knowledge in the Sahel zone ofNiger, Paper 1 25 1 presented to Symposium
1 5 , l ih World Congress of Soil Science, Thailand, 1 4-2 1 August 2002 .
226
Hayward, B . W. & Brook, F . l, 1 980 : Exploitation and redistribution of flax snail
(Placostylus) by the prehistoric Maori , in, NZ Journal of Ecology, 4 :33 -36
Healy, W. B . , 1 980 : Pauatahanui Inlet - an environmental study, [DSIR Information Series
1 4 1 ] , DSIR, Lower Hutt, 1 98pp
Heaphy, Major (VC) . , 1 869: On the New Zealand Flax Phormium tenax, in, Transactions
of the New Zealand Institute, 2 : 1 1 6- 1 1 7
Heenan, P . B . , 1 99 1 : Checklist of Phormium cultivars, Publ . RNZIH, Lincoln Univ. 57pp
Heiser, C. B(Jr) . , 1 973 : Seed to civilisation: the story of man 's food, Publ . W H Freeman &
Co. , San Francisco, USA. 243pp
Henry, E., 2000: Kaupapa Maori : locating indigenous ontology, epistemology, and
methodology in the academy, in, Building research capabilities within Maori communities:
proceedings of a wananga, Publ. NZCER, Well ington, New Zealand. pp7-26.
Hewett, E . W. , 1 980 : Horticulture, in, Land alone endures (Ed. L. Molloy), DSIR
Discussion Paper #3 , Publ. DSIR, Well ington . pp89- 1 04.
Hindmarsh, G. , 1 994 : From Russia with respect, in, NZ Geographic, 23 : 65-8 1
Hindmarsh, G. , 1 999 : Flax, the enduring fibre, in, New Zealand Geographic, 42 :20-53
Hochstetter, F. V. , [ 1 959] : Geology of New Zealand: contributions to the gpc/f);;; �.( fh.,?
provinces of Auckland and Nelson, Government Printer, Wellington. 320pp.
Hogg, G. , 1 963 : Pathfinders in New Zealand, Whitcombe & Tombs Ltd, NZ. 1 89pp .
Hond, R (Ed.) . , 1 995 : He puranga takupu a Taranaki: draft Taranaki wordlist,
Unpublished book, author. 1 37pp .
Hoover, K. & Donovan, T . , 200 1 : The elements of social scientific thinking, Publ : Bedford
St Martins, Boston, USA. 202pp.
Horrocks, M. , 2004: Polynesian plant subsistence in prehistoric New Zealand: a summary
of the microfossil evidence, in, NZ Journal of Botany, 42 : 32 1 -334
HortResearch, 2006: Fresh facts,· New Zealand horticulture 2005, author. 3 3pp .
Host, E . , 1 974 : Nelson Lakes National Park, Publ . Nelson Lakes National Park Board,
Nelson. 87pp
Hunt, R. , 2003 : The kiwi palm: Nikau, in, New Zealand Geographic, 65 :74-87
227
Hunter, R. M. 2003 : Brief of evidence presented to the Waitangi Tribunal of the Te Atiawa
o Te Tau Ihu Claim (Wai 607) , presented at Waikawa Marae, P icton, Jan . 2003 .
Hyams, E . , 1 952 : Soil and civilisation, Thames & Hudson Publ . London . 3 1 2pp.
Inkson, K. & Kolb, D., 1 998 : Management: perspectives for New Zealand, Longman Publ.
Auckland. 558pp.
Jackson, S . , 2006 : Compartmentalising culture : the articulation and consideration of
indigenous values in water resource management, in, Australian Geographer, 37( 1 ) : 1 9-3 1
Jacomb, C . , 1 994 : The archaeology ofWaihoralLake Ellesmere, in, Davies, 1. D. G;
Galloway, L . & Nutt, A. H . C (Eds) : Waihora Lake Ellesmere,· past, present, future, Publ .
L incoln Univ. Press, Canterbury. 1 34pp.
Janick, J., 1 978 : The great sweet/potato controversy, in, Horticulture, 42 :42-47
Jones, D. L . , 1 994 : Palms throughout the world, Reed New Holland Publ . , Sydney,
Australia. 4 1 0pp
Jones, K. L . , 1 984: Dune soils and Polynesian gardening near Hokianga North Head, North
Island, New Zealand, in, World Archaeology. 1 6( 1 ) : 75-88
Jones, K. L . , 1 986 : Polynesian settlement and horticulture in two river catchments of the
Eastern North Is land, New Zealand, in, NZ Journal of Archaeology, 8 : 5-32
Jones, K. L . , 1 989 : In much greater affluence: productivity and welfare in Maori gardening
at Anaura Bay, October 1 769, in, NZ Journal of History, 98 :49-75
Jones, K. L . , 1 989a: Traditional horticulture in the eastern North Island, in, NZ Agricultural
Science, 23 : 3 6-4 1
Jones, S . , 1 998 : Wakatu Incorporation: ko te tuatahi 0 nga tau rua tekau ma tahi - the first
21 years, Publ . Wakatu Incorporation, Nelson. 25pp.
Karlen, D . L; Ditzler, C. A. & Andrews, S . S . , 2003 : Soil quality : why and how? in,
Geoderma, 1 1 4 : 1 45- 1 56
Kawharu, 1 . H. , 1 977 : Miiori land tenure: studies in a changing institution, Oxford Univ.
Press. 3 63pp.
Kawharu, M., 1 998 : Dimensions of kaitiakitanga: an investigation of a customary Miiori
principle of resource management. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Oxford University .
Keenan, D . , 1 994 : Haere whakamua, hoki whakamuri: goingforward, looking back,
unpublished PhD thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North. 248pp .
228
Kess ier, C . A . , 2007 : Motivating fanners for soil and water conservation : a promising
strategy from the Bol ivian mountain val leys, in, Land Use Policy, 24: 1 1 8- 1 28
Kirk, T . , 1 894 : Remarks on the New Zealand Sow-thistles with description of a new
species, in [sic] Transactions of New Zealand Institute; Botany
Knight, H. , 1 966 : Umu-ti, in, Journal of the Polynesian Society, 75 :332-347
Krasilnikov, P. V. & Tabor, J. A., 2003 : Perspectives on utilitarian ethnopedology, in,
Geoderma, I l l : 1 97 -2 1 5
Krippendorff, K. , 1 980 : Content Analysis: an introduction to its methodology, Publ : Sage
Publications, California, USA. 1 89pp .
Lambert, S . , 2004 : The "Place of Place": Geographical indicators in contemporary Maori
development. Proceedings ofTe Ohu Whenua: Hui-a-tau, Palm. Nth, 8-9 July. pp75-79
Law, R. G. , 1 969 : Pits and kUmara cultivation in the South Island, in, Journal of the
Polynesian Society, 78 :223-25 1
Law, R. G. , 1 970: The introduction of kiimara into New Zealand, in, NZ Journal of
Archaeology & Physical Anthropology, S : 1 1 4- 1 27
Law, R . G. , 1 975 : A garden soil at Rocky Bay, Waiheke Island, in, NZ Archaeological
Association Newsletter, 1 8 : 1 83- 1 90
Leach, H. , 1 983 : Model gardens and the acceptability of new crops to Polynesian
horticulturists, in, NZ Journal of Archaeology, S : 1 39- 149
Leach, H. , 1 989 : Traditional Maori Horticulture - success and fai lure in Aotearoa, in, NZ
Agricultural Science, 23 : 34-35
Leach, H. , 2005 : Gardens without weeds? Pre-European Maori gardens and inadvertent
introductions, i n, NZ Journal of Botany, 43 :27 1 -284.
Leach, H. & Stowe. C . , 2005 : Oceanic arboriculture at the margins - the case of karaka
(Corynocarpus laevigatus) in Aotearoa, in, Journal of the Polynesian Society 1 1 4( 1 ) : 7-28
Lehmann, J; da Si lva, 1. P; Steiner, C ; Nehls, T; Zech, W. & Glaser, B . , 2003 : Nutrient
availabil ity and leaching in an archaeological Anthrosol and a Ferrasol of the Central
Amazon basin: fertil iser, manure and charcoal amendments, in, Plant & Soil, 249 :343-357.
Leonard, J. N . , 1 974: Thefirstfanners, Publ . Timelife International, USA. 1 60pp
Lewthwaite, S , L . , 2004: Storage root production in sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas (L)
Lam), Unpublished PhD Thesis, Massey University , Palmerston North. 202pp .
229
Leys, T. W (Ed.) . , 1 890 : Early history of New Zealand, H Brett Publ . , Auckland. 728pp.
Lindberg, D. C., 1 992 : The beginnings of Western science, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, USA. 455pp.
Lloyd, 1 . , 1 950 : Dyes from plants, Publ . Author, Wellington. 32pp .
MacKenon, D . K. L. & Haverkort, A. J. (Eds) , 2004: Decision support systems in potato
production: bringing models to practice, Wageningen Academic Publ . , The Netherlands .
23 8pp.
McAl lum, P. M. , 2005 : Development and care ofpa harakeke in 1 9th century New Zealand:
voices from the past, in, Journal of Maori & Pacific Development, 6( 1 ) :2- 1 5
McCulloch, B . & Trotter, M. , 1 984: Investigations at Takahanga Pa, Kaikoura, 1 980, 1 982,
in, Records of the Canterbury Museum, 9( 1 0) : 3 87-42 1
McFadgen, B . G . & Sheppard, R . A . , 1 984: Ruahihi Pa: a prehistoric defended settlement
in the south-western Bay of Plenty, NZHPT Publ . 1 9 , Well ington. 65pp.
McGlone, M. S. , 1 988 : The Polynesian settlement of New Zealand in relation to
environmental and b iotic changes, in, NZ Journal of Ecology, 1 2 : 1 1 5 - 1 29
McKenzie, E . H . C . & Johnston, P. R . , 2004: Puccinia embergeriae sp . novo on Chatham
Islands sow thistle (Embergeria grandifolia) and a note on Miyagia pseudosphaeria on sow
thistles (Sonchus spp.) in New Zealand, in, NZ Journal of Botany, 42 : 657-66 1
McLaren, R. G. & Cameron, K. C . , 1 994: Soil science: an introduction to the properties
and management of New Zealand soils. Oxford Universi ty Press, Auckland. 294pp.
McNab, R., 1 908 : Historical records of New Zealand, Vol. } , Govt Printer, Wellington
McNab, R . , 1 9 1 4 : Historical records of New Zealand, Vol. 2, Govt Printer, Well ington
McPherson , H. G; Gandar, P. W. & Wamngton, 1. 1. , 1 979: Matching the crop to the
environment, in, Proceedings of the Agronomy Society of New Zealand, 9 :7 1 -78
Maingay, 1., 1 985 : Te hue: people and a plant, Unpublished MSc Thesis, University of
Auckland. 3 30pp.
Mann, C. C . , 2002 : The real dirt on rainforest fertility, in, Science, 297: 920-923
Marsden, M . , 1 992 : God, Man and universe; a Maori view, in, Te Ao Hurihuri, King, M
(Ed.), Reed Publishing, Auckland. pp 1 1 7 - 1 37 .
Marsden, M . & Henare, T . , 1 992 : Kaitiakitanga, a definitive introduction to the holistic
worldview of the Maori, Unpublished paper. 26pp.
230
Maschmedt, D; Fitzpatrick, R . & Cass, A. , 2002 : key for identifying categories of vineyard
soils in Australia, CSIRO Land & Water Tech. Report 3 0102, CSIRO, Sth Austral ia . 33pp .
Mason, R . , 1 950 : Our living environment: water plants, (Post Primary School Bul letin Vol
4, No. 1 2), Publ . NZ Education Dept. Wellington . pp225-256
Matthews, N . , 1 988 : Whether the Maori could weather the wither, in , Journal of the Nelson
& Marlborough Historical Societies, 2(2) : 1 4- 1 5
Matthews, P . 1 . , 1 985 : Nga Taro 6 Aotearoa, in, Jour. Polynesian Society, 94(3) :253-272
. Matthews, P . 1 . , 1 996: Ethnobotany, and the origins of Broussonetia papyri/era in Polynesia: an essay on tapa prehistory, unpublished essay .
Matthews, P. 1 . , 1 997: Field guide for wild-type taro, Colocasia esculenta (L . ) Schott, in,
Plant Genetic Resources Newsletter, 1 1 0 :4 1 -48 .
Matthews, P . 1 . & Terauchi , R . , 1 994: The genetics of agriculture : DNA variation in taro
and yam, in, Tropical Archaeobotany: applications and new developments (Ed. Hather, J) ,
Routledge, London. pp25 1 -262
Mead, H. M. & Grove, N. , 200 1 : Nga pepeha a nga ([puna, Victoria University Press,
Wellington. 448pp.
Metge; .T . & Ki!lloch) P . , 1 984: Talking past each other: problems of cross cultural
communication, Publ : Victoria University Press, Wellington. 56pp.
MAP, 2007 : http://www.mafgovt.nz/statistics/primaryindustries/horticulture/maori
statistics/maori statistics index .htm - accessed 1 5 Jan 07 - - -
Mitchell , H. & Mitchell , J . , 1 996: Kehu (Hone Mokehakeha) : biographical notes, in,
Journal of the Nelson & Marlborough Historical Societies Incorporated, 6( 1 ) : 3 - 1 9
Mitchell, H . & Mitchell, J . , 2004 : Te Tau Ihu 0 Te Waka: a history of Maori of Nelson and
Marlborough, Huia Publishers , Wellington, 489pp .
MMOLDC, 1 998 : Maori Land Development, Min. ofMaori Affairs, Wellington
Molloy, B . , 1 990: The origin, relationships , and use of karaka or kopi (Corynocarpus
laevigatus) , in, Nga mahi Maori 0 te wao nui a Tane (Eds : Harris, W & Kapoor, P) Pub l :
Botany Division, DSIR, Christchurch. pp48-53 .
Mol loy, L. (Ed.), 1 980 : Land alone endures, DSIR Discussion Paper #3 , Publ . DSIR,
Wellington . 286pp.
23 1
Molloy, L . , 1 993 : Soils in the New Zealand Landscape: the living mantle, NZ Society of
Soil Science, L incoln. 239pp.
Moon, P. , 1 993 : Maori social and economic history to the end 0/ the nineteenth cenhlly.
Birdwood Publ . Henderson, Auckland. 1 77pp.
Morrell , W. P . , 1 954: The establishment of the frozen meat industry, in, From Vogel to
Seddon, Post-Primary School Bulletin, 8(3 ) : 6- 1 0
Morrell , W . P . , 1 95 5 : Maori land development, in, New Zealand between the two world
wars 1914-1939, Post-Primary School Bulletin , 9(2) : 1 9-24
Morris, E. E . , 1 900 : On the tracks of Captain Cook, in, Transactions & Proceedings of the
New Zealand Institute, 33 :499-5 1 4
Nelson, P . 1. , 2003 : Soil mapping, compilation and land evaluation of Motueka, Riwaka
and Moutere Valleys, Unpubl ished Master of App lied Science Thesis, Massey University .
1 52pp.
Neuffer, M. G; lones, L. & Zuber, M. S . , 1 968 : The mutants o/maize, Publ . Crop Science
Society of America, Wisconsin, USA. 74pp .
NZ Forest Service, 1 959 : Westland 's wealth, NZFS Info series No29, Govt Printer,
Wellington, 66pp.
NZHPT, 2003 : Archaeological remains of New Zealand 'sfirst gardens
[www. historic. orgnz} Retrieved: 3 1 March 2006
NZIER, 2003 : Miiori economic development: Te Ohanga Whanaketanga Miiori, Publ .
NZIER, Well ington. 1 06pp .
New Zealand Meteorological Service (NZMS), 1 982 : The climatology o/Ohakea
Aerodrome, Ministry of Transport, Wel lington. 20pp .
New Zealand Meteorological Service (NZMS), 1 983 : Summaries of climatological
observations to 1980. Ministry of Transport, Wellington. 1 72pp .
Newman, A. K. , 1 903 : Notes on two Maori calabashes with carved wooden necks called
Tuki or Ko-ano-ano, in, Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, 36 : 1 -4
Nicholas, D . & Kaa, K. , 1 986 : Seven Maori artists, Govt Printer, Well ington, 46pp
Niemeijer, D., 1 995 : Indigenous soil classifications : complications and considerations, in,
Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor, 3 :20-2 1
Niemeij er, D . & Mazzucato, V. , 2003 : Moving beyond indigenous soil taxonomies : local
theories of soils for sustainable development, in, Geoderma, 1 1 1 :403-424.
232
O ' Donnell , E . , n .d: Te Hekenaa,' early days in Horowhenua, being reminiscences of Mr
Rod JvJcDonald, G H Bennett & Co, Palmerston North. 207pp.
Okali , C ; Sumberg, J. & Farrington, J., 1 994 : Farmer participatory research: rhetoric &
reality, iT Publi shers, USA. 1 59pp .
O l lier, C . D ; Drover, D. P. & Godelier, M. , 1 97 1 : Soil knowledge amongst the Baruya of
Wonenara, New Guinea, in, Oceania, 42( 1 ) : 33 -4 1
Ongley, M. , 1 93 1 : Maori terraces, in, NZ Journal of Science & Technology, 1 4 :282-283
Orange, C. , 1 987 : The Treaty ofWaitangi, Alien & Unwin Press, Well ington. 3 1 2pp.
Organics Aotearoa NZ. , 2005 : Formation of Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, press release,
Monday 27 June 2005 (source: http ://www. scoop .co.nz/storiesIBU0506/S00400.htm)
Oudwater, N. & Martin, A . , 2003 : Methods and issues in exploring local knowledge of
soils , in, Geoderma, 1 1 1 : 3 87-40 1
Papakura, M. , 1 93 8 : The old time Maori (T. K. Penniman, Ed.) , Publ . V ictor Gol lancz Ltd,
London. 350pp .
Park, G . , 1 995 : Nga Uru 0 ra, the groves of life. Ecology and history in a New Zealand
landscape, Victoria University Press, Wellington. 376pp.
Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, 2004: Growingfor Good: Intensive
farming, sustainability and New Zealand 's environment. Parl iamentary Commissioner for
the Environment, Well ington . 236pp.
Patete, A., 1 997 : D 'Urville Island (Rangitoto ki te tonga) in the Northern South Island
(Report for claim Wai 1 02), Publ. Waitangi Tribunal, Wellington. 23 1 pp.
Pere, R. R. , 1 982 : Ako, Publ . Te Kohanga Reo National Trust, Wellington. 1 03pp .
Pere, R. R. , 2000 : Different ways of knowing, in , Building research capabilities within
Maori communities: proceedings of a wananga, Publ . NZCER, Wellington, New Zealand.
pp27-28 .
Petyt, C . , 1 999: Farewell Spit,' a changing landscape, Terracottage Books, Takaka. 1 90pp .
Phillips, C; Johns, D . & Allen, H. , 2002 : Why did Maori bury artefacts in the wetlands of
pre-contact AotearoalNew Zealand? in, Journal ofWetland Archaeology, 2 : 39-60
Phill ipson, G. A . , 1 995 : Rangahaua Whcmui District 13: The Northern South Island - Part
1 , Waitangi Tribunal, Wellington. 2S6pp
233
Ph i l l i pSOI1, G . A . , 1 996 : Rangahaua Whanui District 13 : The Northern South Island - Part
2, Waitangi Tribunal , Wel l i ngton . 69pp
Pierce, F. 1. & Lal , R. , 1 99 1 : So i l managelnent in the 2 1 st century, in, in, Soil management
for sustainability (Eds: Lal , R. , & Pierce, F. J), Publ . Soil & Water Cons . Soc. Iowa, USA.
Pp 1 75- 1 80
Pond, W., 1 997 : The land with all woods and water, Waitangi Tribunal Rangahaua Whanui
Series, Waitangi Tribunal, Wellington . 1 57pp
Potton, C . , 1 986 : The story of Marlborough Sounds Maritime Park, Publ . Marlborough
Sounds Maritime Park Board, Picton . 1 60pp .
Powick, K. , 2002 : Ngii take matatika mo te mahi rangahau Miiori: Miiori research ethics,
unpublished research report, University ofWaikato, Hamilton. 69pp.
Prickett R. C. & O'Byme, T. N., 1 972 : Recommended conservation land use of the West
Coast region, South Island, New Zealand, Publ . Min or Works, Christchurch. 53pp.
Raynal , F . E., 1 8 80 : Wrecked on a reef· or twenty months in the Auckland Isles [English
translation] , Publ . T Nelson & Sons, London. 2 1 4pp.
Reed, A. W. , [2002] : The Reed dictionary of New Zealand place names, Reed Publishing
NZ Ltd, Auckland. 62 1 pp.
Richards, R., 1 993 : Rongotute, Stivers and 'Other' vis itors to New Zealand, in, Journal of
the Polynesian Society, 1 02( 1 ) :7-38
Rigg, T. , & Bruce, 1. A. , 1 923 : The Maori gravel soil ofWaimea West, Nelson, New
Zealand, in, Journal of the Polynesian Society, 32(2) : 85-93 .
Riley, M . , 1 994: Miiori healing and herbal, Publ. Viking Sevenseas NZ Ltd, Paraparaumu.
528pp.
Roberts, M; Haami, B; Benton, R; Satterfield, T; L 'Finucane, M; Henare, Mark & Henare,
Manuka. , 2004: Whakapapa as a Maori mental construct: some impl ications for the debate
over genetic modification of organisms, in, The Contemporary Pacific, 1 6( 1 ) : 1 -28
Roberts, M; Weko, F . & Clarke, L . , 2006: Maramataka: the Miiori moon calendar,
Resea�ch Rpt 283 , National Centre for Advanced Bioprotection Technologies, L incoln
Univ. 3 5pp.
Roman, R. P; Jonathan, A. S. & Joseph, A. T., 1 992 : The role of indigenous soil knowledge
in agriculture development, in, Journal of Soil & Water Conservation, 47 :298-302
Roskruge, N. , 1 996: Development of the Tuhoe land resource: horticulture options,
unpublished Honours research report, Massey Universi ty, Palmerston North, 65pp.
234
Rosknlge, N . , 1 999: Waitara ki Waikanae; an essay on notable events of Atiawa migrations
- 1820- 1848, unpublished research report, Massey Univers i ty, Palmerston North . 9 1 pp.
Roskruge, N., 1 999 : Taewa Maori; their management, social importance and commercial
viability, unpublished research report, Massey Universi ty, Paln1erston North . 82pp.
Roskruge, N., 2002: Maori organics, in, RM Update, 1 1 : 9 (Publ . MAF, Wellington)
Roskruge, N . , 2004 : He kai kei aku ringaringa, in, Proceedings ofTe Ohu Whenua: Hui-ii
tau, Palmerston North, 8-9 July . Pp 67-69
Roy, B; Popay, I ; Champion, P ; James, T. & Rahman, A. , 1 998 : An illustrated guide to
common weeds of New Zealand, Publ . NZ Plant Protection Society . Lincoln. 282pp.
Royal, TeA. C . , 1 993 : Te Haurapa: an introduction to researching tribal histories and
traditions, Publ . Bridget Will iams Books Ltd, Wel lington. 1 1 1 pp
Royal , Dr TeA. C . , 2004 : Matauranga Maori and museum practice; a discussion,
unpublished report prepared for Te Papa National Serv ices, Well ington. 76pp
Royal , TeA. C . , 2007 : Maruruahu tribes, Te Ara - the Encyclopaedia of New Zealand,
updated 1 3 April 07. (accessed: 30 May 2007)
http : //www .TeAra.govt.nzlNewZealanders/MaorilNewZealanders/MarutuahuTribes/en
Rudman, B . , 1 992: Why are the cabbage trees dying? in, NZ GeogrQP,hi� 1 4 ·46-64
Ryder, R. , 2003 : Local soi l knowledge and s ite suitabi l i ty evaluation in the Dominican
Repub lic, in, Geoderma, 1 1 1 : 289-305 .
S t John, H. , 1 954: The Hawaiian variety o f Dioscorea pentaphylla, an edible yam
Hawai ian plant studies 22, in, Journal of the Polynesian Society, 63 :27-34
Sandor, J . A., 2006 : Ancient agricultural terraces and soi ls, in, Footprints in the soil:
people and ideas in soil history, (Ed: B. P. Warkentin.) , E1sevier Publ. The Netherlands.
pp 505-534.
Sandor, J. A. & Eash, N . S. , 1 995 : Ancient agricultural soils and the Andes of Southern
Peru, in, Soil Sci, Soc. Am. Journal, 59 : 1 70- 1 79
Sandor, J. A; Winklerp rins, A. M. G. A; Barrera-Bassols, N . & Zinck, A. , 2006 : The
heritage of soil knowledge among the World' s culture, in, Footprints in the soil: people
and ideas in soil history, (B . P . Warkentin . Ed.), Elsevier Publ . The Netherlands. pp 43 -84.
Scheele, S., 2002 : Traditional uses of tii leaves, in, He korero korari, 1 2 : 1 9-2 1
235
cheele, S . & Wal ls, G. , 1 994 : Harakeke,' the Rene Orchiston collection, Pub ! . Manaaki
Ihenua Press, Lincoln. 25pp .
choon, T . , 1 962 : Growing Maori gourds, in , Te Ao Hou, 39(June ] 962) : 38
cott, D . , 1 97 5 : Ask that mountain: the story of Parihaka, Publ . Reed/Southern Cross,
.uckland. 2 1 6pp.
hawcross, K., 1 967 : Fern-root, and the total scheme of 1 8th Century Maori food
roduction in agricultural areas, in, Jour. Polynesian Soc. 76 : 3 30-352
hawcross, K. , 1 967a: Maoris of the Bay of Is lands, 1 769-1840,' a study of changing Miiori
�sponse to European contact, unpubl . Master of Arts Thesis, Univ. of Auckland. 3 80pp .
hepherd, T. G. , 1 99 1 : Towards sustainable soil and crop management of arable land.
ISIR Land Resources Techn ical Record 56 , Palmerston North. 20pp.
hepherd, T. G., 2000: Visual soil assessment. Volume 1. Field guidefor cropping and
'1storal grazing on flat to rolling country. Publ . Horizonsmw & Landcare Research,
almerston North, 84pp
hepherd, T. G; Ross, C. W; Basher, L. R. & Saggar, S . , 2000 : Soil management guidelines
lY sustainable cropping, Manaaki Whenua Press, Lincoln, 25pp .
hepherd, T. G. & Park, S . C . , 2003 : Visual soi l assessment: a management tool for dairy
lrmers, in, Proceedings 2003 Dairy3 Conference, Rotorua 7-9 April 2003. pp 1 1 1 - 1 23
hortland, E . , 1 856 : Traditions and superstitions of the New Zealanders, Publ . Longman,
rown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, London (copy held, Univ. of Auckland Library)
lderius, W. & de Bakker, H. , 2003 : Toponymy and soil nomenclature in the Netherlands,
l, Geoderma, I I I : 52 1 -536.
lmpson, P. G . , 2000 : Dancing leaves: the story of New Zealand 's cabbage tree, tii kouka,
anterbury University Press, Christchurch. 324pp.
lmpson, P. G . , 2005 : Pohutukawa and Rata; New Zealand 's iron-hearted trees, Te Papa
ress, Wel lington, 346pp .
lmpson, P . G. & De Lange, P . J . , 1 992 : Saving plants by growing them in gardens, in,
eople, plants & conservation - Botanic gardens into the 2 rl Century, RNZIH Annual
onference.
k.inner, W. H . , 1 9 1 2 : Ancient Maori canals, in, Jour. of the Polynesian Soc. , 2 1 : 1 05 - 1 08
mith, M. , 2005 : He kai kei aku ringaringa: I can grow food with my own hands, Waitomo
ews, 8 March 2005 , pp2-3
236
Smi th, S . P . , 1 9 ] 0 : History and traditions of the Maoris of the West Coast, North Island of
New Zealand, Thos Avery Ltd, New Plymouth, 5 7 1 pp .
SorensoD , 1 . L. , 2005 : Ancient voyages across the ocean to America, in , Journal of Book of
Mormon Studies, 14( 1 ) : 5 - 1 8
Spedding, C . R. W., 1 988 : An introduction to agricultural systems, Academic Press,
London. 26 1 pp
Stowell, L . , 2002 : Tracking roots of hi story, in, Wanganui Chronicle, Pg 1
Sullivan, A. , 1 972 : Stone wal led complexes of Central Auckland, in, NZAA Newsletter,
1 5 (4) : 1 48- 1 60
Sutton, W., 200 1 : Maori horticulture development meeting 617101, unpublished notes. MAP
Maori Policy Unit, Well ington. 7pp.
Sykes, W. R., 1 977 : Kermadec Islandsjlora: an annotated check list DSIR Bulletin 2 1 9,
Publ . DS IR, Wel lington. 2 1 6pp.
Tabor, J . , 2006 : Use of ethnopedology in soil surveys, presentation to the 1 8th World
Congress of Soil Sc ience, July 9- 1 5 , 2006, Philadelphia, USA.
Tahuri Whenua Inc. Soc . , 2005 : Strategic Plan for Tahuri Whenua Incorporated Society,
Publ. Author, Palmerston North. 33pp
Tait-Jamieson, A. , 2004: Cuisine goes wild, in, Cuisine, 1 02 : 1 42- 1 5 1
Taranaki United Council (TUC) . , 1 985 : Planningfor land diversification, author, 1 60pp.
Tapsell , E., 1 947: Original kiimara, in, Journal of the Polynesian Society, 56 :325-332
Taylor, N. H . , 1 95 8 : Soil science and New Zealand prehistory, in , NZ Science Review,
Sept-Oct 1 958 : 7 1 -79
Taylor, N. M (Ed.) . , 1 966: The journal of Ensign Best 183 7-1843, Govt Printer,
Wellington. 465pp
Te Puni K5kiri , 1 994: Te Wao Tapu Nui a Tane: forestry investment for Maori, Publ . ,
Author, Wellington. 1 40pp .
Te Puni K5kiri . , 1 997 : A guide to the Maori Reserved Land Amendment Act 1997, Publ . ,
Author, Wellington. 1 6pp.
Te Puni K5kiri . , 2003 : Hei whakatinana i te turua po; business success and Maori
organisational governance management study, Publ . , Author, Wellington . 85pp
237
Tipa, G . & Tierney, L . , 2003 : A cultural health index/or streams and waterways:
indicators for recognising and expressing Miiori values, Ministry for the Environment,
Wel l ington . 72pp
Toledo, V. M. , 1 992: What is ethnoecology? Origins, scope and implications of a rising
discip l ine, in, etnoecologica, 1 ( 1 ) : 5 -2 1
Toledo, V . M. , 2002 : Ethnoecology : a conceptual framework for the study o f indigenous
knowledge on nature, in , Stepp, J . R; Wyndham, F. S . , & Zarger, R. (eds) , Ethnobiology
and Biocultural Diversity: Proceedings 0/ the Seventh International Congress on
Ethnobiology, Athens: University of Georgia Press, USA. pp209-229 .
Toole, A . , 2006 : Investigation into the fire hazard and thermal properties of using Typha
seeds as an additive in plaster in New Zealand, (a report submitted in partial fulfilment of
the requirements of the BE(Hons) degree in Natural Resources Engineering at Canterbury
University) . Unpublished report, Canterbury University , Christchurch . 47pp.
Tregear, E. R. , 1 904: The Miiori race, Publ . A D Will is, Wanganui . 592pp .
Vietmeyer, N . , 1 99 1 : The lost crop of the Kiwis, in, NZ Geographic 1 0 : 64
Wakatu Inc . , 1 994 : A new strategic plan, Publ . , Author, Nelson . 8pp .
Wakatu Inc . , 1 998 : Ko te tuatahi 0 ngii tau rua tekau ma tahi: thefirst 21 years. Publ . ,
Author, Nelson. 25pp.
Wakatu Inc. , 2006: Chairman 's report: special mid-year general meeting, Publ . , Author,
48pp
Walker, M. , 1 994: Miiori science,' response to an article by M Dickison, unpubl ished.
Walker, R . , 1 996 : Ngii Pepa ii Ranginui: the Walker papers, Penguin Publ . , Auckland
2 1 5pp.
Walsh, Rev. Canon, 1 900 : On the occurrence of Cordyline terminalis in New Zealand, in,
Transactions & Proceedings o/the New Zealand Institute, 3 3 : 3 0 1 -306
Walsh, Archdeacon, 1 902 : The cultivation and treatment of the kiimara by the primitive
Maoris, in, Transactions & Proceedings o/the New Zealand Institute, 3 5 : 1 2-24
Walsh, Archdeacon, [ 1 974] : Notes on Maori food stores, in, (Best, E) , Miiori storehouses
and kindred structures, Government Printer, Well ington. pp 1 09- 1 1 2 .
Walton, A. , 1 983 : Made soils in the vicinity of Aotea Harbour, in, NZ Archaeological
Association Newsletter, 26(2) : 86-93
238
Walton, A. , 1 984: Made soils in the Waitara River Valley, Taranak i , i n , NZ Archaeological
Association Newsletter, 27( 1 ) : 56-63
Warkentin, B . P. (Ed.) 2006 : Footprints in the soil: people and ideas in soil history. Publ .
Elsevier Publications, The Netherlands . 548pp .
Warn, S (Sonny), ND (circa 1 975) : Te Ika a Maui, Owae Marae, unpublished
Webb, T. H. & Wilson, A. D . , 1 994 : Classification of land according to its versatility for
orchard crop production, Landcare Research Science Series #8, Pub l : Manaaki Whenua
Press, Lincoln, 3 1 pp.
Wel lman, H. W., 1 962 : Maori occupation layers at D 'Urville Island, New Zealand, in, NZ
Journal of Geology & Geophysics, 5 : 55-73
Whitaker, T. W. & Carter, G. F., 1 954: Oceanic drift of gourds - experimental
observations, in, American Journal of Botany, 4 1 (9) : 697 -700
White, Moki . , 1 99 1 : Submission to the Waitangi Tribunal in the matter of the Taranaki
Claim, Owae Marae, Waitara. 1 1 Apri l 1 99 1 .
Whyte, W. F . (Ed.), 1 99 1 : Participatory action research, Sage Publ . , California, USA.
247pp.
Will iams, A. & Walton, A. , 2003 : Early landuse patterns in the Lake Taupo area (science
foy conservation 222), Dept. of Conservation, Wellington. 28pp.
Williams, B. J., 2006: Aztec soil knowledge: classes, management, and ecology, in,
Footprints in the soil: people and ideas in soil history, (B. P. Warkentin. Ed.) , Elsevier
Publ . The Netherlands. pp 1 7-4 1
Williams, H. W. (Ed.), [ 1 992] : Dictionary of the Maori Language, GP Publishers,
Wellington . 507pp.
Wilson, D . M., 1 922: Ancient drains; Maori drains, North Auckland, in, Journal of the
Polynesian Society, 3 1 : 1 30- 1 34
Wilson, A. D . & Giltrap. D. J . , 1 984: Soil evaluation and classification systemfor orchard
crop production, Publ . NZ Soil Bureau, DSIR, Lower Hutt. 54pp .
Wimshurst, 1 . M; Higham, T. F . G; Al len, H; Johns, D. & Phil l jps, C . , 2004: Early Maori
settlement impacts in northern coastal Taranaki, New Zealand, in, NZ Journal of Ecology
28(2) : 1 67- 1 79
Winder, V. , 1 999 : Garden for all of us, in, The Daily News, 3 Apri l 1 999, Pg 29
239
WinklerPrins, A. M. G. A. , 1 999 : Local soi l knowledge : a tool for sustainable land
management, in, Society & Natural Resources, 1 2 : 1 5 1 - 1 6 1 .
WinklerPrins, A. M . G. A. , 200 1 : Why context matters : local soi l knowledge and
management arnong indigenous peasantry on the Lower Amazon Flood Plai n , Brazi l, in,
Etnoecologica 5(7) :6-20
WinklerPrins, A. M. G . A . & Barrera-Bassols, N., 2004 : Latin American ethnopedology : a
vision of its past, present, and future, in, Agriculture & Efuman Values, 2 1: 1 39- 1 56
Wiseman, R. M. , 1 998 : Pre-Tasman explorers, Discovery Press, Auckland. 406pp .
Wuest, S . B ; McCool, D . K; Mil ler, B . C . & Veseth, R. l , 1 999 : Development of more
effective conservation farming systems through participatory on-farm research, in,
American Journal of A lternative Agriculture, 1 4(3 ) : 98- 1 02
Yen, D . E . , 1 959 : The use of maize by the New Zealand Maoris, in, Economic Botany
1 3 (4) : 3 1 9-327
Yen, D . E. , 1 96 1 : The adaptation of kumara by the New Zealand Maori, in, Journal of the
Polynesian Society, 70 : 3 3 8-348
Yen, D . E. , 1 962 : The potato of early New Zealand, in, The Potato Journal, 1 96 1 /62 :2-5
Yen, D . E . , 1 963 : The New Zealand kUmara or sweet potato, in, Economic Botany
1 7 ( 1 ) : 3 1 -45
Yen, D . E . , 1 974: The sweet potato and Oceania, Bishop Museum Press, Hawaii, 389pp .
Yen, D . E . , 1 990 : The achievements of the Maori agricultural ist, in, Nga mahi Maori 0
te wao nui a Tane (Eds : Harris, W & Kapoor, P), DSIR, Christchurch. pp37-42 .
Yin, R. K. , 1 994 : Case study research,' design and methods (2nd Edition), Thousand Oaks
Sage Publ , California, USA.
Yin, R K., 2003 : Case study research design and methods (3rd Edition), Sage Publ .
California, USA.
240
Personal communications
NOTE: Many of these personal communications (including many that are not listed here)
are with kaumatualkuia who offered insight into matauranga and tikanga relevant to the
topic of th is thesis over several decades. The interactions have been informal, ongoing and
knowingly contributing to my understanding of the subject which has now culminated in
this thesis. l'lga mihi atu ki nga kuia me nga kaumatua, nga mihi aroha ki a koutou katoa.
Mr Akerama Taiaki, kaumatua 0 Ngati Rahiri ki Whakarongotai ; 28 Jan 2006
Mrs Arohanui Lawrence, pakeke 0 Ngati Kahungunu, 23 March 2006
Mr Ben Maruwehi Manaia, kaumatua 0 Ngati Ruanui; 28 January 2006
Mrs Christina Kawau, pakeke 0 Te Whanau a Ruataupare; March 2003 (& other dates)
Mrs Daphne Ngawaipaera Attenborough, pakeke 0 Atiawa; March 2003 (& other dates)
Mr Ernest (Bunny) Gripp; pakeke 0 Ngati Toa Rangatira; March 2004 (& other dates)
Mrs E (Ngungu) Sal inovich, kuia 0 Ngati Rahiri ; 1 997 (since deceased)
Mr Hamiora Hautapu, pakeke 0 Ngati Porou; March 2004 (& other dates)
Hemi Bai ley, kaumatua 0 Atiawa, Motunui ; July 2000 (since deceased)
Hemi Cunningham, kaurnatua, N gati Hauiti ki Rangitikei; December 2005 (& other dates)
Herb Makene, kaumatua 0 NgapuhilNgati Ruanui ; March 2003
Mrs Hinehou Lincoln, pakeke 0 Ngati Porou; 1 996 (since deceased)
Mrs Hiria Matson (Gerrard), pakeke 0 Ngati Porou; December 2004 (& other dates)
J W (Bill) Nuku, kaumatua 0 Ngati Maru; December 2004 (since deceased)
Mr Kahu Stirl ing, kaumatua 0 Ngati Porou; November 2004
Mrs Mahinekura Reinfelds, pakeke 0 Ngati Mutunga (mai 0 Parihaka), January 2006
Maikara Tapuke, pakeke 0 Ngati Rahiri ki Taranaki, March 2004 (& other dates)
Ms Makuini Chadwick, pakeke 0 Ngati Hine ki Te Tai Tokerau; January 2006
Mrs Materoa Frew, tillpublished notes to support this thesis; May 2003 .
Ngapera Teira, kuia 0 Ngati Rahiri ki Taranaki ; March 2004 (& other dates)
24 1
v1rs Ol i ve Bul lock, kuia 0 Nga Raual 111e Taranaki whanui ; March 2004 (& other dates)
v1r Pak i West Raumati ; pakeke 0 Ngati Mutunga/Ngiii Tahu, March 2003 (& other dates)
vir Paora Kruger, kaUluatua 0 Tuhoe; June 1 996
virs Pearl Kahurangi Lewis, pakeke 0 N gati Rahiri ; March 2003 (& other dates)
)ita Richardson, kaumatua & Chainnan, Parewahawaha Marae Committee;
; 0 Deceluber 2005 , February 2007 (& other dates)
vIrs Queenie Gripp, kuia 0 NgaRauru, Wai-6-Turi Marae; March 2004 (& other dates)
vir Rangipo Metekingi, kaumatua 0 nga uri 0 Aotea; Apri l 2005 (& other dates)
vir Renata Tawhai McClutchie, pakeke 0 Ngati Porou; Deceluber 2005 (& other dates)
(ichard Brown, Horticultural Manager, Ngatahi Horticulture; 9 & 1 0 June 2004
virs Rita Cossey (Nuku), kuia 0 Ngati Maru; March 2005 (& other dates)
t6pata Taylor, CEO Wakatu Inc; 8 June 2004
virs Ruth Jones, Te Tai Tokerau (Awanui) ; February 2004 (& other dates)
virs Sophie Lawson, kuia 0 Atiawa, Waitara; 1 989 (since deceased)
�angira (Stan) Farquhar, Ngati Rahiri, pre- 1 993 (since deceased)
Jrs Te Ra Wright & Mrs Ei leen Winikerei , kuia 0 Ngati Apakura hapu 0 Maniapoto,
�anehopuwai Marae; 1 9 December 2004.
IIr Te Uri Hautapu, pakeke 0 Te Whanau a Ruataupare; March 2003 (since deceased)
I1r Toro Ihaka, kaumatua 0 Te Aupouri, 1 992
I1r Truby Karauria, kaumatua 0 Ngati Porou, January 2006 (& other dates)
I1rs V M Adlam, kuia 0 Ngati Rahiri ; 2000 (since deceased)
Vairingiringi Taiaki, pakeke 0 Ngati Rahiri ; March 2003 (& other dates)
!lrs Wharemawhai (Mina) Timutimu, kuia 0 Ngati Rahiri ; March 2003 (& other dates)
!lrs Whero-o-te-rangi Bailey, kuia 0 Taranaki Tuturu; December 2004 (& other dates)
V (Bil l) Sutton, MAF Maori Policy Unit; 6 July 200 1
242
Appendix 1
Maramataka Maori (Atiawa vers ion) - Maori calendar for fishing and horticulture
Hei whakamiiori i tenei e mau ake nei; No 1 (Whiro) - ko le ra i muri iho 0 la to Pakeha new moon
(the day after the new moon on the calendar) ; No 15 (Rakaunui) - ka te ra i muri iha a la le
Pakehafull moon (the day after theful! moon on the calendar)
riD AY NAME NOTES
.-1 ___ 1 Whi�a-- He ra kino tenei mo te ono kai ma te hi ika, hoki . I A bad day for fishing or p lanting, the moon is out of sight
I 2 1 Tirea He po ahua pai tenei mo te hi koura, tuna mo te ono kai
I A good day for planting, fishing, torching eels and crayfishing
� r--Ha-o-h-ao-a-t-a---- He ra tino pai tenei , mo te hi tuna, koura ono klimara ono hoki i
I etahi atu kakano
1 �----------A very good day for planting ldlmara or any seed, also crayfish ing or torching eels, especial ly if the moon is out of sight
4 1 Oueouk-.:;----- I He ra pai mo te ono kai, he ra pai mo te hi ika �I ----- I�-A-g-o-o-d--d-ay--fo-r-p-I-a-n-t i-n-g-a-n-d-fi-l s -h i n-g-, -fr-o-m--d -a w-n--t o--m-i-d-da-y-------- -.----------------------------------------------------I 5 I Okoro 1
.-
H
-
e
-
r
-
a
-
p
-
a
-
i
-
a
-
n
-
o
-
t
-
e n
-
e
-
i
-
m
--
o
-
t
-
e _o_n_o_k_a_i _h_i _i k_a_h_o_k_i ________________ ___
r-- l· I A reasonable day for fishing, good day for planting from midday to I sunset r I Tamatea kai ariki
�I --- -----------------------------------------
He ra ahua pai mo te ono kai mo te hi ika, he ra hau, he kaha te ia
11
I tera pea e marangai
Fair day for planting and fishing. It is windy and the sea currents
are strong, expect a change in weather. � -· Th-;;;�t�_; �g�;�g�- · · ·- I --H� ··· ;a · pai m o t e hT i k a ;-ki�-tuP�t·�···t�-h�_;r;_kT·t�-h i i ka i n g a n-ga r u -
1 . pua i nga kohu. He ra pai ki te ono kai .
� A
.
very good day for fish ing, watch out for the weather. It is either a
1 big heave or a misty day. A good day for cropping also . r Tamatea aio
1
He ririki te tuna, te ika me te kumara i tene i ra engari he nui tupato
te hunga ehi moana.
Eels, fish, ldlmara etc are plentiful but small in size. If boating,
keep an eye on the weather.
� r--Ta-m-a-t-ea---- He pai mo te ono kai i te ata ki te ra-tu. Kaore i tino pai mo te hi ika
I whakapau pou nga tamatea. r--------------�------------��----������-----
r--,
Fair for planting from morning to midday only. Only fair for any
I sort of fishing.
�I � -Ar-j-----
--, He ra kino tene i .
I
1 A bad day. OK for crayfish only.
1"---1 -I ����mm���.� ____ ���������_=���==����C9Be����� __ �
243
I I, N o t a g o o d d a y fo r p l a n t i n g o r f i s h i �g . E e l s a n d c r a y fi s h w i l l g e t �l , very timid. !:j
� ·-M-a-w h-a-r u ---- He r a t i n o pai t e n e i m e t e ono k a i , h e n u n u i t e k u m a r a e n g a r i k a o r e I
I e roa ka pirau he ra pai ki te hi ika.
1 A g d d fo la f ng b t the produce does not keep for very very 00 ay r p n I u I long . A good day for fishing. I 1 3 . r-.. :fu;;----. ---_. : E hara i te ra pai mo te ono kai, mo te hi ika rane i. I It is not a good day for planting or fishing
�r-' I He pai tono mo te hi ika mo te ono kai, i muri 0 te ra tu, ki te ra to . A fair day for fishing, especially on the incoming tide, and for planting from midday to sunset.
r- Rakaunui I He ra tino pai mo te ono kai, ahakoa he aha taua kai ra pai mo te hi ika kaore e t ino pai no te hi tuna.
t
t
.
l A very good day for planting and general gardening, not so good for '
r----··--------· - --·-··--·------ ---------··-
eeling but good for other fish.
I 1 6 Rakaumatohi I He -ra tino pai mo te ono kai: mo te hi ika, kaore �� te tu�----
11 As for Rakaunui, a very good day for planting & fishing bu t not eel ing.
r-
1
I 1 8 I I 1 9
I I 20
I
Takirau maheahea I
I Oike I I
I Korekore te I whiwrua I
Korekore te rawea I r-- -·----
. I I
Takirau maheahea, kua makoha te marama te ririki te kLimara, te
koura, te tuna.
The moon is losing its brightness. Kumara planted on this day are
small , also crayfish and eels. Best from dawn unti l midday.
E hara i te tino ra pai , mo te ono kai mo te hi ika ranei
It is only another day, not the best for planting or fishing.
E hara i te ra pai, mo te ono kai , mo te hi ika ranei .
It is only another so-so day for either planting or fishing.
E hara i te po pai tenei .
Not a very good day at al l .
FI�r�kore�oa-- 1 He pai tenei ra atu i te ra-tu, ki te ra-to. Koia nei etahi ra pai ki te patu tuna, koura, ika me nga momo kai katoa. A very good day from midday unti l sunset for both planting and fishing.
I 22 I I 23
1
124-
[
I Korekore piri k i I He ra pai ki te ono kai ki te hi ika, koura, tuna. nga tangaroa I A very good day for planting, fishing, crayfish and eels.
Tangaroa p i ri a I He ra pai tenei ki te ono kai, ki nga mahi hi ika koura
mua I A very good day for planting, fishing, crayfish and eels, especially : from noon unti l sunset.
._-_._----_._--_ .. __ ._-----_ .. _. �------ --.-- .
Tangaroa piri a . He ra pai tenei ki te ono kai , ki nga mahi hi ika koura
roto A very good day for fishing, crayfish and eels. This is the best day
for planting kumara, taewa & other root crops, in general the best
day for any planting in the garden . Also excel lent for deep-sea
fishing
. . '
244
in-A-Y- I NA-M-E---- I NOTES
r-2S-- , T a n g a r o a a k i o k i o ' -H-e-r-a-p-a-j-t -e-n-e-j -k-j -t e-o-n-o-k-a-i ,-k-i-t-e-h-i-i k-a-, -k-o-u-r-a-, -tu-n-a-------
I---- ! I A very good day for planting, fishing, crayfish and eels. 126-.- 1-Ao tan�---- --' [ tk'-ra pai tenei ki te ono kai, ki te hi ika, koura, tuna
" A very good day for planting, fishing, crayfish and eels. Also
I . . excel lent for deep sea fishing.
r-n- Orongonui ··-- Ir-He ra tino pai tenei mo te ono kai hi ika, koura, tuna. He pai mo te 1 waihanga whakaaio.
r--- A very good day for planting, fishing, crayfish and eels. Also a 1 I good day for business .
'-28-- --M��-- --- ----- I E hara i te ra pai tenei he oro mauri te kai ka oma.
29
INot a very good day for planting or fishing. Fish, eels and crayfish
I are very elusive. l0;;-�tu --------00-- 1 E hara i te ra pai tenei .
r-I -- I I It is not a good day at al l ! � 1 · - M �htWh����- ------· r-E-h-a r-a-i t-t-e-r-a-p-o-p-a-i -t e-n-e-j-k u-a-h-j n-a-p-o-u-r i-t-e-a-o-e-a-i k-i n-g-a-k-o-re-r-o-o-
1 neke ra. [-- - 1 j"It"is not �-go�'�i"-day at a l l : the world i� in da�kness ! -------
245
Appendix 2
Indigenous use of biological indicators of soil quality : vegetation and soil macrofauna
(Source: Ettema, 1 994)
�
MalaysIa
Shipibo, Peru
Caatinga, Brazil
S. Mexico
Maya, Mexico
Kekchi, Guatemala
Mebengokre, Brazil
Gabarone, Botswana
Yoruba, Nigeria
Niger
. '
\ .,
Y oruba, Nigeria
Sukuma, Tanzania
Niger, S ierra Leone
. Ecuador
Thailand
.. <
VEGETATION
: ' .
� . :
Kedukuk bush (Melastoma) indicates high Aluminium level
Pohon bakan (Hanguana) tree indicates acid soi l with stagnant
water
Use indicator plants for soil hydrology
Thinly wooded vegetation indicates imperfect drainage
Sparse vegetation is general indication for tierra delgada, thin
soi l
Dark coloured vegetation indicates high soi l ferti l ity
Use indicator plants for site suitab i l ity for Milpa agriculture
Use indicator plants for general site suitabi li ty
Use indicator plants for soil ferti l ity
Odundun (Kalanchoe sp. ) indicates high soi l ferti l ity, whi le
Eran (Digitaria horizontalis), Okan (Combretum platypterum)
and Pepe (Mallotua oppositifolius) indicate poor ferti l ity.
Dark, dry roots of mi l let seedl ings indicate ' sick' soil which is
not ferti le
SOIL FAUNA < • >.
Earthworm cast ind icate ferti le soil
Termite soil is ferti le, soil c lassification
presence/absence
. .
based on their
Soi l close to ant and termite hi l ls is ferti le and planted with
special crops
Earthworm casts and grub casts (?) indicate good soil
Soi l from termite hills is used as soil ferti l ity improver
246
Maori Land Court Boundaries - 2007
r� � ion I
r . g it I I I .2
r ... g i� ln ,
,\ u c k la n d Il I rlJ rm�l l i I I I 1 ) lri cl;:
I ' l _
Image downloaded from http ://www .justice.govt.nzJmlc/ (October 2007)
A pendix 3
247
ppen
Hue (Lagenaria siceraria) - vernacular associations86
-- -- _._- - - -- - . - --Kowenewene, wenewene I Alternative names for gourds (Ngati Porou)
Kotawa I Immature fruit
Kakano I Seeds of hue
Rau kakano or patangaroa I Cotyledon leaves
Rau-tara I Third leaf
Pii taihinul pii tauhinu I Fourth leaf
Hika I Growth stage just before branching
I Toro I Lateral runners
I Tohihi I Young shoots - edible
I Kawail klwai I Branches, shoots or runners of the p lant
I Kia, kiaka, koaka I Generic term for calabash or fruit
I Emiemi r 'pito ' of the hue - remains of the petals which remain at the base
I Pukahu I Spongy interior of the fruit
I Whakaaiai I Process of hand poll ination
I Whata-ipu I Platform for storing gourds (North land)
I
- .- I Oko Small hue cut in half and used as bowls
I Hue puruhau I Musical instrument - deep vibrating sound
I Hue puruwai I Musical instrument - rain sound
I Poiawhiowhio
Koauau ponga ihu
Rara
Potaka hue
Ororuarangi
I Musical instrument - swung around the head on a string and imitated bird noises
Musical instrument made from very small gourds - simi lar to
flute
Shakers or rattles
Humming top
Flute made from the neck of gourd - the holes are close together
along the flute.
Ngurul rehu ------- [ Mouth or nose flute made from stem end of the gourd �---------------------------Pu-te-hue Atua al igned to the hue plant and products
Whakarau To prime seed by soaking in water and then burying in warm
Taha tarata
Taha koukou
Ipu
Taha huahua
Taha wail huewai
Ipu whakairo(iro)
Wawahi taha �iato ; Kahaka; Kokako-ware; Pahau ;
Pahaka; PahawalPahaua; Pare-tarakihi ;
Upoko-taup6; Wharehinu; Whakahau
matua; Whangai-rangatira; Upokotaipii
Ikaroa; Manuka-roa
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
I
soil to germinate
Gourd for storing pia -tarata or scented gum from tarata
Gourd for scented oi l used for anointing hair
Generic name for water vessels
Large gourd for storing preserved birds
Gourds suited to storing or carrying water
Carved water vessels
Broken calabash
Varieties of gourds for various uses
Varieties specific to Bay of P lenty
IX
I
Puau; Rorerore Varieties of gourd used for taha huahua _....J
86 Best 1 902, & 1 976; Maingay, 1 985; Beever, 1 99 1 and various informal informants
248
Appendix 5
Taewa (Solanum tuberosum) - vernacular associations87
Taewa I G e n e r i c n a m e - Te T a i H a u a u r u ' T e T a u I h u ,
I Parareka I Generic name - Ngati PoroulTaiRawhiti
I Peruperu I Generic name -Te Tai Tokerau
I Mahetau; make tau I Generic name - Ngai Tahu
I Riwai I Generic name
I
Tatairongo/tatarako; tutaekuri/urenikal Cultivar names - dark skin & flesh
mange mange; keretewha; tuarua;
ringaringakatira; parakaraka; piakaroa;
para-kokakolpokerekahu; peruperu
Karuparera; kowiniwini ; karupoti ; Cul tivar names - multi coloured skin, some flesh
raupi ; ngamere colouring
Moemoe; uwhiwhero; pawhero; uhi- Cultivar names - red or pink skin, white/cream flesh
po; makoikoi ; tairutu; te Maori;
rakiura; kohatuwhero; poiwa
Huakaroro; wakaora; ngauteuteu;
I
Cultivar names - yel low/cream or brown skin
paapaka; rapirurufwairuru; maitaha;
whanako kimokimo; ngaoutiouti;
kapa/parihi/tekepo; matariki; Waikato;
rokeroke
I Horotae/barirae I Pre-European cultivar - Aotea region
I Rokoroko; araro; tapapa; aka-raupo I Pre-European cultivars - Mataatua region
! Wini-harete I Pre-European cultivar - Te Tau Ihu
I Kopara; waitaha; kariparo I Obscure variety names - Ngai Tahu
Nipa; kotipu; kotipo; tahore; atiti ; Obscure variety names
huamango; pairata; nepenepe; piho;
ngangatawhiti; katote; huarewarewa;
puahinahina; ongaonga; te rautika;
whakairirongo; rape; matawhahati
i Takuru I True seed of potato plants (as against tuber ' seed')
I Pukeko I Crops harvested from previous seasons planting
I Tamahou I Newly harvested crop (huahou -newlimmature potatoes)
I Tauhere, puakiweu I Spoi lt tubers
I Uwhi (Leach, 1 983) . I Winter grown potatoes (Northland)
I Puhina I Barren seed tubers
I Puweku l pueru I Unproductive crops
I Ropi Small blue potato, self propagating on Taukihepa (Mutton Bird Islands)
I Kapana makurnaku Small blue potato, sel fpropagating on Poho-o-Tai (Mutton Bird Islands)
I Kirikiri I Waste potatoes (especial ly small ones used as pig food)
87 Andersen, 1 926; Best, 1 976; Roskruge; 1 999; Ashwel l , 1 999; Harris 2002 and various informal informants
249
Appendix 6
_____ �------------�------------��----------------- ------------------ I
[ a r a k � k e (Phormillm tenax) - v e r n a c u l a r: a s s o c i a t i o n s
,ohanga; Tupurupuru; Maaeneene; Tukura; Potaka; I 'akirikau; Paoa; Oue; Turingawari; Taniwha; Pango; I .uawai; Tapamangu; Parekoretawa; Tane-a-wai; Te Tatua; 1atawai Taniwha; Tarere; Waihirere
Variety names : Tc Tai Rawh it i
'arariki; Atarau; Taeore' (Taiore); Tuutaewheke; Huuhiroa;
,tiwhiki; Ate ' (Rati); Parekoritawa; Raumoa; Ngaro;
�opakipaki-�ka; Ateraukawa; Koraka; Ngutu-parera; Ririhape
Valiety names: Te Tai Hauauru Ir----
-I
1awaru; Paretaniwha; Wharanui; Awahou; Ruahine
1akaweroa; Motu-o-rui; Taumataua; Arawa; Ruapani ;
,roro-wharawhara; T�kaiapu
Variety names: MataatuaIBay of Plenty
�oohunga; Raumoa; Ngutunui; Rataw�_; Rerehape 1 Variety names: Maniapoto, Tainui rohe
�-a-u-h-a-n-g-ar-o-a-; -T-a-a-p-o-to-;-R-an-g-i-w-a-ho-;�T-e--M-a-t-a-T-a-k-a-i-ap-u":";- r Vari ety names: Kahungunu
v'hareonga�r:tga; \Vharanui ., 1
rgaro (Ngaru); Opiki . Variety names: ManawatulWel l ington
'ihore harakeke Generic term for very fine variety
1uka; whitau Dressed flax fibre
[iraka Fibre resembling si lk
ibariki/ takaJ porera/ tienga Woven floor mat
:aitaka; kakahu; mai Variations of woven cloaks
.
.
atua/ tu I Generic terms for belts made from flax ----------������----�-- I atua whara/tatua pupara Itatua korara Men 's belts with designs woven into them
u maureal tu muka r-I -W-o-m-e-n-'-s-b-e-I t-s--------------
--ar--ae--ra-e---------� .. ------------�---�---------- I
-
.
- . .
atu ngaro ,
Woven sandals
Plaited fly swat
-iu-p-i-u-a-h-i-�----:-----..::-----"--------- I Plai ted fan to. ass ist rekindl i ng fire
, ,
'
" -i p-a-r-e /-k-o p-a
-
r
-
e----=--- -'---- =-=-
-------'-----:.-"- - -- I N a r r o w p l a i t e d h e a d b a n d s
..
.
-
..
aepae umu; paepae raranga; paepae whakatu;
oronae; konae
kopae; -rv ari ous �e�- 0 f bands--u-se-d---a-ro-u-n"":d-th-e-e-d-g-e-o-f-I
an umulhangi to keep food in place on stones
-------�
.
�.�'.�- -.. �. --� . . �--.-=--. �'�- --.-
.. --�.----------------------apora . . 1 Woven mat to cover food in an umu
-:e-t-eI-k-o-n-o-I-r-o-u-ro-u----::...::...-....:..:...:.;;;...::..----.:.:.:....;·:.;..·..::;.....::::..:...:.:..· -::::--· ---':..:.-::.
.
· ":"--' 1 Varieties of woven kits and baskets
.
awe 1 Woven backpacks
-a / m-a-m-a-r u-------
--'------:.-:.:. .· .. .;-'-'---.. .. .. .::. ..---'-'- --- , P l a i t e d s a i I s
- ,
ia harakeke . .. .-M-u�cu�s-e-x-tru-d-e-d-f-ro-m-t-h-e-b-a-s-e-o-f-I-e-av-e-s-�---'
.
u harakeke
-
11 harakeke (pa muka)
. orari
. urawaka
-
akirikiri
.
.. .
. . .
.
.
., � - ..
-
-- .•. : .
Single flax plant or single clump of plants
Flax plantation
Flower stalk
Seed capsule
Leafbutt
.
- .. - _ . "
...
.
. ". _.' .. . __ _ _ . .. , c ._ :._ .. _. _, ___ ,;� ' ___ .
'
_
-_ . . . .
urake; Pakauka Outside leaves of bush, usual ly discarded
i ta Inner, unopened leaves; usual ly left uncut
.onenewai :.. Drinking cup made from the 0ax leaves .
Iharariki (Phormium cookianum) Whakari-Urewera cultivaT_ WhitaulWhararipilWharaeki-obscUTe'cultivars
-.
.
.. ,
.
-
, .., . -; : .
ource: Heaphy, 1 869; Best, 1 977; Buck, 1 923 & 1 924; Andersen, 1 926; Heenan, 1 99 1 ; Scheele & Walls,
:)94 & various informal i nformants
250
Appendix 7
Pou Herenga Value set - Source : AREDS, 2002 : Miiori Economic Development: te huarahi
pai, a jilture pathway, Auckland Regional EconOlnic Development Strategy.
Pou Herenga -Va lues
Mana
(.<.:
-=- :' ! -:--':�. '>' .: : , ,'
�'-.
- " ' ; '. · , ·l(01�1..
: '.' .�I.QI.(l.tq , . ... ' . 'n.Y£l
-
.
... ..
,
'��.'� : ' I : ' d 1 QJ . �,... ' . �� / (';1 ('0 " a.. ... ...
""
�
-' � :::J ' :::J ,
'
.
c:'..l
. • •. c;:s C j!P I ' . ..c 0) CJ) . I � . (";:I � ..cl . . 3
. .
-
.:.
.
..
.
.
"
.,:" : . ...
- .-. � -.
Kaupapa Maorj
r- $ L :. -._ . - g;:,�; "Vhan�l.:.-�i--"-- - � - - � ::-===1 � .=-- ;__ _� _ . .'-' ."" - , ., .. ,
I Va'lue I Definition I "MA'·; Whanau I Family 1
Posit.ion
on l\·1arae :
ATEi\ A , Tanga ta \Thenua -'I 'lhe local people or horn�: people -- I M ! I I !- -__ o ___ +! I _T_'_a_u_I'a_< he __ r e _________ �i_:r=_=_e o_:_) .. .. .. r)-l e-";;-+-, o . . w h a k ap�ra r o a n o t h e r a r c ;� ;
:-.t !\ l 1 1
p o (J p o
I IVfanaakitanga j Va lue, respect, acccptrmce and supporting /1 r, _____________ -+I_C_)n_e_>_a_nL_o_t_h.e��r _______________ �. I Whakamana I ELal)l.ing, cmpO\vc:ring: bui lding
I " confidence and unl.kJ:stmding I Rangatiratanga J Leading with con""idence and integrity
I and from a Tc r\O !\t:'lori ':{,iOrlJ \' icw
i Whanaungatanga I :\ct\vorks, working and \valking together
Kaupapa l\1aori i l\!,aori p�occsses, Y��(,s, '�c :�o r\'bOl�i " --'-1
I \\:, od d VJ ew. A'hwn tor .\·1aon
r Wairuatanga ![ :-\��no"vledging ,!Dd \v�)rki l:g '\\---i th
I ,pmtu:tl ,-orld :uw'Y' m ffimd
i !I l nrcgrirr, profe�sionalism, tikanga .MaCiri
; and trm'lsnarcnl...\i
o I I .
,
T I Kotahitanga J Strong individual s '\vork:ing togcrhcr on J\
L-__ ���: ____ �i __________________________ �I_t_' �_, e. __ s ?_, m __ �. k._. a U J _) a_l_) rt. ___ ________________ �
25 1
T H [ f t O E R A T [ 0 N o f
Ki1JIJAKITANGA
llill.E�:
1 . Identify tilonoa
2. Develo(J taonga polir.ir:s re :
- social
AcrJO!'ili:
· cultural/t radit iOJl;!1
- sustairwbility
- "exploitation"
1 . Protect Taonga:
· ra l lui
- st relations with
rele vant agoncies :
- Waitangi Tribllnill
- f-isheries Commission - Maori Lann Court
· ete
&ll1J1!£Afl.W.£B ..Q 14YGc1
1 . Idcn tify oPfJorlLlnities
/ . Ident i f y cOl1straints (lnlf imperlil1 lcl lts
:�. Iden l i ly proeedllfAS for:
- pro-nlmissi(1r1 - Manri Land Court - ete
N A 0 � [ A U T H 0 R I T I [ � H O D � l
- 0.' _ _ _ - -
KAlWH,/:tKAIfAEB£!JJfY.M
1 . !denti ly OWJlers. Benefir.iMic!-
2. EnlJ)owcr Owners
�. A�!.>()ss aspirill ion;,
4. I'ncourage partic:cDCltion
bV O\'-IOers
1 . I\ppnint Atlrninis rrll !rll'
2. rJel,lelop OWIlt!rs'
ReUislCr
:-l. Gr.' V:1iuct:; He crucubr:xf lL�n.L; t;un\,cniu:l ril��'Jr.$ u:;Wllcd j;l Fcnill"\cr l{�orm:,·�nJ.aliuns
r"r Postl:r:, olT,JC .. Or,; i l l ��W Z�,.J,,,,d ( J 9�,t) cnmpi lo.1 hy ! S Comrllnh 4'-U i\ G Siq.;hir .
Carhon
'!'n
I .3
. Tt:li.Il Carbon ; 'IIlC T,·rnl Nirl'''�.�11 '."'cre (!ctt:rm:u:xJ by lR and Te \!-=lI ..:�li oJ\ :·" i:o\lr;n� CUmbu. ... l:cn :(1 ;1:1 ill..1\h;:i'"'11 tum:.cc (LECO) ..
OIt!-'1I".1;C 11l:').::cr W.J.,.' ciclC"rml:1:U f1I.JlI}(:.·fl"'-lli<�ll1)'. o:vr - OC x 1 .72
/ZJ�'/ - ¥4:
SICN�V :_---,;::..:/_,I):.._·_·l_-:'_-'_: ·_-_·::_-_'t_--_7'_-_l_. __ (..:.:>_
�Jr 1.. D Curric (Tcclmil:�l Hamiltoll, New Zp.;,land
R J Hill laboratories Lirnile0":;,,. ,-�"."'.,.o
Magnesium (mei100g} 1 .39 1 .00 - 3.00 Ih� ;:tl:' ,:.;, ..
I Sodium (me/100g) 0. 1 2 0.20 - 0.50 ,
I
CEC (mei1 00g) 1 5 1 2 - 25 ':" , . -
Base Satur�tion ("la) 65 50 - 85 ' �'''-' "
Volume Weight (g/mL) 0.88 0_60 - 1 .00 :.."'. : -� • ,. _:-,s '" - '1
I
I Available N (kgiha) 1 1 3 1 50 - 250 "-� :;-;;.
:
Or90nic tvI<:ltter (%) 5.2 7.0 - 1 7.0 10.;-:'-:;,: :,;::-". ,-;; :
Total Carbon (%) 3.0
Total Nitrogen (Ofu) 0.29 0.30 - 0.60 " ,
CIN Ratio 1 0.3
AMNITN Ratio (%) 2.9 3.0 - 5.0 �-;c·,�'-':.,;.:.:c::i(l
Base Saturation K 3.0 Ca 52 Mg 9.4 Na 0.8
MAF Units K 8 Ca 8 Mg 28 Na 5
Anaerobically Mineralisable N 86 ug/g
H �.�
. 4:',-:' " A.. I , � , I "- . .
Laboratories
Page 1 of 2
I I
I I
I I
I ; :
I
: I I
I I
I ,
I I
I ,
I I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
�
I I
I
I I
, I
I : I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i I
I
Th" abu'� nUldent graph c.o",o::re!: the IC'lel!: fOUnd Wltll rc�orcr.cc Irloq::rot