The Guardians have been looking at this bylaw and trying to find positive aspects to it that would benefit mooring owners and recreational users.

Unfortunately we can’t find any benefits, only negative impacts, this bylaw is quiet clearly a way to legitimize the Port Companies desire to clear all the moored vessels that presently occupy water space that they desire , against the wishes of the community and Te Atiawa, to allow them to expand their marina by 4 football fields out into Waikawa Bay.

This By law is just another example of “The Tail Wagging the Dog” The Port company says jump, and you say How High !

Your role is to serve the community, not to help the Port Company to develop and grow in such a way as its developments have a negative impact on the Sounds Environment and our community.

You say that the moorings in Waikawa are a shambles, only because council has deliberately allowed it to degenerate , you have systematically refused to renew resource consents until many of those mooring owners in Waikawa are in limbo.

You say that we need a mooring Manager, This would be creating another unnecessary level of beauracracy, that will have to be managed and funded.

But hang on a minute we already have a harbor master with a deputy and an assistant , they have a fully equipped office, vehicles and a wonderful craft to use for navigational safety and harbor patrol work.

Mooring management has traditionally been their role, if anyone is going to be a mooring manager it should be the Harbor Masters Office. And if mooring owners have to pay an annual fee , we can all live with that, within reason !

But what we strongly object to is council hiring a consultant to run and manage what should be the Harbormasters function.

You propose to give him sweeping powers to make up new rules as he sees fit with no consultation process !

He will have the right to board confiscate and remove a vessel that the owner hasn’t paid his account.

He will have the right to reposition your vessel anywhere inside the management area. To his discretion, at the moment my mooring is a GPS position, and this is associated with our property, we chose this position for a number of reasons, distance from shore, swing room, depth of water , if it is moved any further out it will lose the shelter afforded by the headland and be much more exposed.

To think that a mooring manager good have the right to just come along and shift my mooring to suit his agenda doesn’t sit well with me.

My Resource consent to occupy that particular spot is an individual property right that we should all guard jealously.

This Bylaw if forced upon mooring owners will mean that instead of an individual Resource consent which gives the holder a 15 year tenure or right to occupy the seabed , this will be replaced with a one year tenure with no guarantee of renewal.

If the owner upsets the manager, or more likely the people who are really pulling these strings the Port Company that mooring owners tenure will not be renewed.

This is a trick that works very well for the Port Company, it is an extremely efficient way of controlling opposition to development.

They have all of their tenants on short term leases , the tenants have to sign agreements that they will not object to any port company operation and will not make submissions against any new developments.

Question needs to be asked “ How is this any different, ? You propose to take away a 15 yr individual property right and replace it with a 12 month short term lease with NO guarantee of renewal.

You try and justify that by saying , you don’t have to keep renewing your R/C and having to incur

Associated costs, but if you add up the cost of a $200 management fee by 15 years it will be more than you have to pay for renewing your resource consent.

Another serious concern is that you say the mooring manager has to cover costs, you don’t stipulate that it will be a non profit making organization.

We have all been down this trail before, with marina berths and wharf age fees controlled by our friends at Port Marlborough.

The cost of berths were originally affordable, then the prices rose by , 10% pa, 20 % 50%, !00% then 300% the rates are now that high that the average wage earner cant afford to keep his boat in a marina.

When they increased the rates for Tutanekais berth from $3000 pa to $ 6.500 PA that forced us to leave Picton Harbour.

So take heed from that ! the Port Company have spent a huge amount of money putting this private plan change together, they have convinced council to promulgate a By Law to manage the so called “Bay Wide solution” Solution to what ?

Solution to achieving their goals of a further marina extension, and because they just happened to pay you a dividend of 7 million dollars this past year they expect you to oblige.

It must be Non Profit making , otherwise it will turn into another marina scenario !

The buying and selling by the Port company and certain companies and individuals, has forced the values of moorings up from $500.00 up to $20,000 !

If the Port Company want those moorings out of their way they should provide the owners with free berths in the new marina ! That is fair and logical.

Some owners like me prefer to have their waka on moorings, in that instance, if the moorings are relocated and they are required to have screw anchor and bungy cords the Port Company should have to upgrade the mooring tackle.

Why should the mooring owner have to subsidize the Port Company development.

Speaking as a launch operator who steams in and out of waikawa Bay most days over The summer Months, believe me when I say the moorings don’t want to be any closer together than they are now.

The Port company have been circulating a diagram that shows lots of overlapping circles and telling everyone who will listen that its chaotic out there.

Of course the swing circles overlap they always have done, but you don’t have vessels crashing into each other everytime the wind blows. The time when it can happen is in conditions of very light or no wind when they very rarely come back to back, but because theres no wind, no damage is done and as soon as the wind picks up they all swing the same way.

You say that if in over 7 metres of water depth mooring owners will have to upgrade their tackle to a screw anchor and bungy, this could cost between $5000 and $10,000 that’s what I was quoted by the mooring provider.

This is an unfair and unreasonable expense to impose on a mooring owner, and it impinges on our human rights, because it doesn’t improve our moorings, if anything the failure rate of screw anchors is higher than of the conventional system and when it comes time to service your mooring they are much more expensive because instead of just lifting the mooring block with its own tackle the service provider has to send a diver down to inspect the tackle.

Our recommendation is ;

Don’t change what isn’t broken, Council and Harbor master have allowed the mooring situation to degenerate for a number of reasons, main one probably being the Foreshore and seabed issue, council are wanting to introduce coastal occupancy charges but need to wait until the fore shore and seabed is resolved, the Port Company Marina development has forced your hand.

All you need to do is do what you recommend about repositioning the Waikawa bay moorings and allocating space for relocated moorings( at port Companies expense).

Reissue resource consents for those mooring owners with 15 yr tenure, as a condition of consent owners need to agree to a regular inspection , that carries some kind of warrant of fitness ( for insurance purposes. )

The management needs to be undertaken by the Harbor masters office, not an independent consultancy firm ! and any associated costs passed on to mooring owners but on the understanding that it is to cover costs only and not to generate profit !

This community is very distrustful of the Port company, in the last 12 months the council or its commissioners have made several decisions relating to navigational safety and issues regarding licenses to occupy the seabed, the decisions took into regard, the boating communities rights of access, traditional rights, privatization of the seabed, treaty of Waitangi, associated costs being that high they could force small operators out of business.

The decisions made on these issues, has brought about a renewed level of confidence in the MDC, you have listened to the community on these issues.

Listen to us now , don’t allow Port Marlborough to bully you into setting up a system that will please them but disenfranchise the boating public.

Dear Minister

My wife Takutai and I attended your road show in Blenheim. I raised an issue; you said I would be contacted so there would be further discussion.
Your secretary took our contact details but as yet contact has not been made!

Ownership of the seabed is an issue about perception. In 1850 Maori owned and controlled the vast majority of NZ, the pakeha population was roughly 2,000 people Maori population over 500,000.

The perception of the time was that Maori owned the land and resources; this was guaranteed by Article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi.

“Full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their lands forests and fisheries.”

This ownership was acknowledged by the New Zealand company who when they purchased the village of Waitohi off Te Atiawa in 1840, also purchased the seabed out as far as Mabel island  so that they could develop a working port.

This is a significant precedent as the NZ Company were heavily involved  in large scale land purchases around Whanganui, Wellington, Blenheim, Nelson, Lyttelton.

I know of no act of parliament where any successive govt ever proclaimed govt ownership of the foreshore and seabed we agree that the 2004 act was an act of modern day confiscation, and a huge black mark against the Labour government.

We saw the act and the furore over access to the beaches as a red herring when the govts real focus was on total ownership, they knew that in the next 100 yrs the countries wealth will be in the unexploited resources under the sea in the form of gold, diamonds, other ores, precious minerals, oil, fish stocks, iron sands etc….

We are pleased that this act is to be repealed and would like to see it adjudicated in the Maori land court and supreme court., we would rather see  the courts ratify ownership as opposed to the “Lets make a deal approach, “ that seems to be favoured by the minister.

This issue over ownership needs to be sorted once and for all or it will continue to haunt future generations, we owe it to our grand children to sort this issue properly, property rights and customary rights.

Heoi ano, the taki that we raised with the minister is a burning issue in the Queen Charlotte Sounds, the issue over the National Govt bill that has allowed for the unfettered growth of aquaculture.

Government has also pressured our local body government  to change our District Plan to open the Sounds up and make it into one great big aquaculture farm.

These licenses are for the right to occupy the seabed for 35 yrs, council draft them as controlled activities which means that when the time frame is up the council have no option but to renew. ( provided they comply with conditions. )

This is the right to occupy in perpetuity, OWNERSHIP OF THE SEABED.

The Queen Charlotte is the only true sheltered recreational area between the Hauraki and Fiordland, and as such needs to be protected and restored, for recreation and tourism, ideally as a National park.

Mr Minister you told me that you weren’t the man to speak to, that I should be talking to the minister of fisheries, Conservation…… I know all that BUT this act is about ownership of the foreshore and SEABED, that this government is happy to sell off to multinational companies with leases held in perpetuity.

The Pelorus Sounds is now full to the eyes with aquaculture farms, now they want to take over the ownership of our seabed as well.

We honestly believe that licenses to occupy our seabed needs to be an issue that is addressed under this act and respectfully request that you acknowledge the issue that we have raised.
The Queen Charlotte Sounds Tourisim industry representatives and Guardians Of The Sounds, are happy to meet with you and discuss this issue in more detail.
Noho Ora Mai,
Pete & Takutai Beech.
Chairman of The Guardians of The Sounds, and Eco-Tour operator in the Queen Charlotte Sounds.

Kia Ora everyone,
Well its that time again, another 12 months of campaigning behind us, so whats to report;
Well the issue that has dominated our energies for the last 12 months has been the Methyl bromide fumigations at Port Shakespear. Every fumigation releases up to 5 tons of a deadly toxin into the atmosphere with no controls , and limited conditions Methyl Bromide is a neurotoxin that you can not see, taste or smell and culminates in your system.

You and I need to have a resource consent to light a bonfire, because of the smoke, Marlborough District Council are going to ban log fires because they pollute the atmosphere , yet they wont insist on Genera the fumigators or Port Marlborough  having to have a resource consent for this potentially lethal activity.

This is because of their vested interests , Marlborough District Council are the 3rd biggest forest owners in Marlborough, and they own 100% of the shares in Port Marlborough.

It’s hard to believe that in this day and age that a district council could put their vested interests ahead of the health and safety of our port workers and the entire Picton community.

Because of the campaigning done by the Guardians, Soil and health and the Green Party. Erma the govt agency vested with the task of overseeing the use of toxic substances has initiated a reassessment of the use of Methyl Bormide.

Their initial recommendation was to do nothing for 10 yrs, it was a decision reached after weighing up the benefits that M/B has to the national economy opposed to the negative impact that it has on health and safety and the environment.

Their latest recommendation after reading all the submissions is virtually unchanged, although they say that that could change if new information comes to light following the hearing of verbal submissions that we will be making this coming Wed, but Don’t Hold your Breath. !

The reality is that Erma aren’t going to do anything , so the sooner this reassessment is completed the better and we can put pressure on the Marlborough District Council to put  use the tools in their tool box to make it a consented activity and put a robust air plan in place .

Remember that it is election year so you need to be mindful of which Councilors have been supportive throughout this campaign.

I’d like to thank all the people who took part in the two protest rallies held in the past year, it takes a huge amount of energy to organize a rally , on the 17th of Sept we held a large rally on the Picton Foreshore, Tony Coia then gave us a subsidized price to run his big bus through to Blenheim , ( for the first time in the history of our province, the people of Picton marched on Blenheim.

We then stacked the public gallery of the MDC committee room , and it nearly turned into a riot when the Mayor said that we were just a noisy minority who didn’t represent the Picton community, however sanity prevailed, but it was very disappointing to witnesses our two Picton concillors vote against  us !

Another rally was held on the 23rd of April , again a wonderful turnout, this time supported by the combined trade unions, we got a letter back from Sue Kedgley thanking the Guardians for organizing the rally , she said that of the  rallies held in CHCH, Picton Wellington and Tauranga , the Picton rally was by far the biggest and the most effective .

Other issues that we have been involved in:
Back in Feb Guardians along with mooring owners, iwi and Stephan Browning were influential in preventing Port Marlborough from obtaining a resource consent to obtain a licence for control of the seabed of Shakespear Bay.
If granted this would of given them the virtual ownership in perpetuity, ( privatization of the Seabed.) The application was declined in its entirety and has set an important precedent. In regards to privatization of the Seabed of the Queen Charlotte Sounds.

We have attended the  Govt road show over the Foreshore and Seabed Act and sent in our submission.
We have been involved in the Picton advisory group, but have resigned from this until such time as they restructure , as it is, it is nothing but a talk fest that the Marlborough District Council set the agendas, they provide the facilitator, they audit the minutes, the members representing stakeholders don’t have a mandate to vote on an issue  as the representative of their organizations, so no votes can be taken and no resolutions reached.

It is just another example of the Marlborough District Council manipulating our community with a seen to be done consultation exercise , but as an entity they have no teeth.

We put them to the test and after about 3 months finally got the majority of the members to vote to get the Marlborough District Council to put an airplan in place to stop the release of Methyl Bromide over Picton.
A letter to that effect was sent to the Mayor,  before the Sept rally and subsequent council meeting to discuss the issue.
The Mayor said he never received the letter and both the councilors voted against us.!

So that was re enforced our suspicions that this group is a waste of time.

I have been attending the
Marlborough District Council focus group  meetings to do with the marine side of the rewrite of the Regional policy statement , this has been a battle but we have been able to influence this process to a degree.

As I told you this time last yr, I fear that our biggest challenge is ahead of us with the Govt, and their Aquaculture amendment bill that allows for the unfettered growth of aquaculture, and them ordering the Marlborough District Council to make changes to the District ( Sounds Plan ) to open the Marlborugh Sounds up for the development of aquaculture.

Before the end of the yr you will see the application by King Salmon for 5 new AMA’s ( Aquaculture Management Areas), if they only put one farm per area this will effectively double the number of Salmon Farms in the Queen Charlotte Sound in one hit.
Believe me that is just the start of the privatization of our seabed !

So the battles continue, unfortunately our bank account is nearly empty with less than $500  left, we will be sending out the membership accounts after the AGM so if you want us to keep fighting to keep the Marlborough Sounds as a recreational area and not have it taken over by the multinationals, industries and corporate entities  please give us your support.

We are happy to give freely of our time and energy but there is an associated cost and without your financial support this has to come out of our own pockets.

On a positive note the Marlborough Sounds Restoration Trust that Guardians support has gone from strength to strength  in the last year, the Wilding Pine project has been remarkably successful and on 18th of May we will be holding a workshop to discuss new projects that the trust could be involved in like Pest Control, native reforestation projects, programmes to reintroduce  native birds that have been lost to the area.

Every year the sounds environment is getting more and more beautiful as the bush regenerates, but there is lots that we can do to accelerate this process.

One of the wonderful spin offs of the wilding pine project is that many of the Sounds bay communities have got actively involved  with the trust, this community  involvement is something that we want to develop more with future projects.
If any of you have questions about the trust give me a call.

Well that’s more than enough from me, Go well everyone , hope you have a warm and dry winter, Keep the Home Fires Burning ,
Arohanui,
Pete & Takutai