by Catherine Delahunty
Wainuiototo or New Chums beach on the coastal Hauraki/Coromandel is ranked in the top 20 wild beaches in the world. The land adjacent to this gorgeous silent place has withstood several development attempts thus far. The latest attempt is by developers from Queenstown, who know all about making real estate suitable for the enjoyment of the elite. But now they are up against the considerable creativity of the lovers of the Coromandel.
Fresh from our Schedule 4 mining victory, the tangata whenua, locals and visitors who oppose the development are gathering national and international support for protection of this place, which is only accessible by boat or by foot. The developers have moderated their original proposal and managed to persuade the regional and local authorities that this is the best that can be done. They want to build only 20 houses with associated roads and one boathouse for their boats on the beach. They are claiming to be ecologically aware and willing to share. But they miss the point. The point is wilderness, silence and a unique relationship that we all long for, a connection with the utterly natural.
The many Facebook Friends of New Chums, the Preserve New Chums for Everyone Trust and other networks are preparing to fight in the courts and in the media. You can sign an online petition to preserve it, or down load the hard copy PDF from the website. 
At the public meeting where I spoke for the Green Party in support of this campaign, more than one hundred people testified to the love of wild places. Peter Johnson from Ngati Hei told us there are at least 19 registered archaeogical sites along that piece of coast. Manawhenua talked of their great grandmothers gathering kai there. The kayak business described the marine experience at New Chums. The local families talked about the place of the beach in their family history and life. Everybody understood the importance of holding on to one of the few jewels left in a developed peninsula where subdivision and marinas have eaten away the magic.
It will be a hard campaign but that is not new for either the Green Party or Coromandel people. We will need that national and international support. But get ready to picnic for paradise this summer. It is worth the trouble when you come over the ridge and down through the nïkau. Wainuiototo
Published in Environment & Resource Management | Featured by Catherine Delahunty on Thu, August 26th, 2010
Tags: beaches, development, New Chums Beach, resource management, Wainuiototo, wilderness
More posts by Catherine Delahunty | more about Catherine Delahunty
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
4 
15 (-11)
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
why don’t you stump up with cash and buy it for your super fund if you think it is so important? Why not do something positive instead of telling others what to do with their property.
Like or Dislike:
8 
8 (0)
New Chums is getting fantastic publicity for New Zealand around the globe – often appearing on lists of the world’s best beaches, best coastline etc.
It’s one of those gems that is highly valuable to NZ for generating millions in advertising of the type you can’t buy – editorial endorsement.
Catherine is right – it’s the wilderness factor that makes New Chums very special (a bit like our Lammerlaw Ranges that we’re trying to save from giant windmills, but the Greens have been incredibly silent on that fight against industrial power generation).
The Minister of Tourism should see what a gem New Chums is, and it’s value to NZ. And he should have the clout to do something.
Like or Dislike:
10 
1 (+9)
Yes, if we want such land to remain undeveloped then it should be incorporated into the Conservation Estate or a Regional Park.
There is no constitutional right to take someone’s land by petition.
Do you want to live in a country where your property can be taken from you because of public opinion?
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
Like or Dislike:
6 
1 (+5)
Sam,
When the State takes your land under the Public Works Act it pays you compensation.
Do you really believe that the State takes land because of lobbying by construction companies?
Why then does the State take land for the Conservation estate?
OR for parks?
Like or Dislike:
3 
6 (-3)
Do you want to live in a country where your property can be taken from you because of public opinion?
…..
No we want to live in a system where we can cream off increasing land values when property is globalised so it evens nicely with property values in Shanghai, London and Tokyo. We will network with real estate agents so we are “in the know” and get our people on council and give generously to whichever political party as “risk management”. We will define property as that which benefits us and ignore externalities which affect other people (sunshine is a luxury not a right when zoning changes in your neighborhood). We will worship growth as always good and leading to a higher standard of living but ignore traffic, noise density and numbers of people at your favourite fishing spot and need for more infrastructure.
PS NZ First was painted as racist and supported by red necks. The truth is that many were the ordinary people who hadn’t “climbed the property ladder” and appreciated the Kiwi lifestyle; they could see we were being exploited by businessmen riding high on capital gains, air head socialists (Green Party) and elites whose poo-poos didn’t smell.
Like or Dislike:
4 
8 (-4)
The foreshore and seabed for example.
All of it should be acquired over time for public domain. Including that in private hands.
Then all of us will be guaranteed access and none of it can be sold.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
“The latest attempt is by developers from Queenstown, who know all about making real estate suitable for the enjoyment of the elite.”
……..
Were you to get your way with the foreshore and seabed it would be tangata whenua who were the elite giving thumbs up or thumbs down.
.
Meteria Turie:
“The Greens support responsible access to the foreshore, which is compatible with Customary Ownership governed by tikanga Maori and the concept of public domain.
“The clearest example is Lake Taupo, where ownership of the lake bed rests with Maori but everyone enjoys recreational access.
“Customary ownership does not provide for the sale of land in the way that freehold title and western forms of property ownership do.”
http://www.indymedia.org.nz/article/66614/foreshore-and-seabed-protecting-public-a?page=1
Like or Dislike:
1 
5 (-4)
Sometimes one has to stand up and do the right thing. Do you really want to walk over the ridge to New Chums and have music pumping from the houses, hear lawn mowers, children screaming. No. The place needs to be safeguarded for the use of all of us. Maybe we should start a fund and buy it back from the developers.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
“All of it should be acquired over time for public domain. Including that in private hands.
Then all of us will be guaranteed access and none of it can be sold.”
….
Public domain means no one owns it Crown ownership means the people own it as the governor general represents the Queen but the GV accepts the recommendations of parliament and the Parliamentarians are elected by the people (although often under false pretenses- (eg) watermelons). Public domain was chosen so indigenous groups could make claims based on customary use.
Next The Tyranny of The Majority
Like or Dislike:
1 
5 (-4)
The tyranny of the majority is a lot better than the tyranny of a small minority. those in parliament, that we have now.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
“The tyranny of the majority is a lot better than the tyranny of a small minority”
-
Agreed.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
The tyranny of the majority is a lot better than the tyranny of a small minority. those in parliament, that we have now.
This minority being the elected parliamentary majority?
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Better still Herodotus, use some discrete high value mining to fund the purchases.
Then the exchange remains within the region.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
I signed the petition! i hope that this beautifull treasure is protected from the wolves of development.
I have been reading about genetics and I wonder if we could erase the ‘greed’ gene from the human species!!! Especially land devlopers!!!!!
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Stephen R Says:
This minority being the elected parliamentary majority?
…..
the Greens don’t have much of a commitment to democracy
http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2010/05/taking-greens-seriously.html
Like or Dislike:
1 
6 (-5)
Owen, you stated that:
“When the State takes your land under the Public Works Act it pays you compensation.
Do you really believe that the State takes land because of lobbying by construction companies?”
Owen, councils do this for private developments all the time!
in 1979 the Thames Coromandel District Council placed a caveat on the Aickin land in Whangamata, so that it it could be used as a recreational reserve. the land sale was completed (by instalments) by 1986.
the prestigious law firm Harkness and Henry has acted for the purchaser, and (forced) vendor, and later the marina developers society.
The descendants of the original owners later attempted to get copies of the land sale documents but were told by H & Henry that they had been shredded.
The zoning of the land was changed in 1992 to facilitate the marina developers society. by members who served on the council. If land is purchased for a particular use by a crown agency in such a manor, then designated for another purpose, by law it must be offered back to original owner. this was not done.
So Owen you must be incredibly naive or ill informed to think this doesn’t go on in NZ.
Conflict of interest is an essential element of doing business in New Zealand, place the magnifying glass over any council. What is most disturbing is that this practice is not recognised as corruption.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
As Greens maintain. Consensus is the best method of decision making, However there has to be a fall back position if consensus fails.
http://blog.greens.org.nz/2010/06/10/canterbury-fights-back-for-democracy-and-clean-water/
http://kjt-kt.blogspot.com/2010/06/kia-ora-greens-talk-about-consensus.html
NACT and Labour have no commitment to democracy Whatsowever.
Some of the new breed like Clare Curran are showing signs of listening to us though.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
The marina in Whangamata is a disgusting example of how a small minority can override the rest of the residents.
The boat club first ruined the swimming area off Aikins place and upstream of the jetty by dredging to the ramp.
Silted up the upstream mooring area.
Then they pinched the reserve for the marina.
Then the marina was built in the only area that had not become to shoal for windsurfing and small boats.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
To true Kerry,
The latest development is that the developers have applied for a NON NOTIFIED Consent to dump up to 10,000 cu meters of dredged sediment along the beach front per year, beside the playground and between and around the natural boat ramp and wharf. The whole area will represent a construction site!
Every indication is that they will get it.
Since the marina has been constructed, more than 14 major non notified and vairations of consents have been granted.
It was supposed to have been thoroughly and exhaustively tested through the courts?
how can that be if Nick Smith directed DoC to pull out of the appeal process when he was minister in 1998?
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Of course developers would say that we are only spoiling it a little bit! which brings up some interesting angles.
Curio Bay in the deep south, a pristine untouched area with high conservation value, a farmer won consents to convert from sheep to dairy, I guess a little urea never hurt anyone.
What is wrong with a few thoughtfully designed houses at New Chums encroaching on the skyline? as long as they are not horrible looking state house boxes?
At Whangamata one of two wetlands that gave that estuary a rating of National Significance has been destroyed for the pleasure of 205 gin palace owners.
The wetland was an important breeding ground for native fish and eel, an anchor for several rare species.
I received a phone call from a friend at Whangamata yesterday, The World Famous Whangamata Bar is now stuffed, no good for surfing.
The tourism industry in the town has crashed.
the method in all these cases is a death by a thousand cuts.
With Whangamata possession is nine tenths of the law.
Once several houses have gone in, some years later more houses will go in.
That is the method.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
.
New Zealand at a crossroads
“Up the road in Queenstown, nature is in full flight.
Queenstown advertises itself as “The Adventure Capital of the World,” where you can bungy jump, heli-ski, jet-boat, or sky-dive. The confines of the modest town can no longer accommodate the throng of thrill-seekers. Soaring mountains still fringe the lake, but condos are creeping along the shore, a snake of traffic clogs the road into town, and Louis Vuitton has set up shop along with Global Culture, a clothes store.
If your idea of a holiday is a seething mass of cars and people, topped off by a cacophony of helicopters, Queenstown may be for you. Otherwise, it serves only as a warning of the perils of overdevelopment.
“Queenstown used to be nice, but it’s a mess, now,” Verduyn says, as we continue our trip down the Upper Clutha. “We don’t want to get like that.”
He points out a bunker-like private dwelling atop a bluff, and shakes his head.
“It was a disaster to put that building in there,” he says. “People from all over the world are coming here seeking a wilderness, a sanctuary. The worst-case scenario is that we damage the environment, which brings people to New Zealand in the first place.”
http://www.boston.com/travel/articles/2004/11/07/new_zealand_at_a_crossroads/
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Here’s Helen:
New Zealand is the new Eden, its clean and green image the beneficiary of a public-relations windfall direct from Middle-earth. Americans are not just visiting the country in numbers unimaginable only five years ago—they’re immigrating, drawn by an arcadian ideal (never underestimate the pacifying effect of several billion sheep), breathtakingly cheap waterfront real estate, see-through fish-tank architecture, and an investment climate that, as one Las Vegas resort owner–cum–South Island winemaker puts it, makes New Zealand “the Switzerland of the South Seas.”
One of the most powerful forces in the shilling of the nation is Helen Clark, familiar to all Kiwis as Madame Prime Minister. In her book, there are no bad tourists, only ones with shallow pockets. And in a recent campaign that will go down in history, Clark aggressively packaged and promoted New Zealand as a place where Californians in particular, because of their relative proximity and the kinship in lifestyles, might consider putting down roots. “Active recruitment,” she called it, and some of the state’s richest residents signed up. Vive le marketing.
http://www.travelandleisure.com/articles/kiwi-country/1
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
From a comunity Newspaper Christchurch:
“Once Redcliffs was an unprepossessing fishing village, distinguished by a collection of modest fishermen’s cottages. Most have now disappeared, replaced by more luxurious residences, and property values have escalated.
“It’s a standing joke that we’re being taken over by the Americans and British, who have taken advantage of the stronger property markets in their own countires and favourable exchange rates”
“I know an English couple who have summer here and go back to England in the winter”
“What other parts of the city have such nice walks?…..”
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Paihia was once an interesting, pretty village. It is now neglected and scruffy. Many houses around are empty most of the time and the owners have no interest in paying for the town centre to be a nice place to visit.
It reminds me of Lautoka. (the non tourist parts).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
jh, Councis are rife with corroption and I am doing my best to unearth a major scandal in my own backyard.
When I referred to the State I was thinking of the State as in central government and the State’s actions are necessarily more open and transparent that what goes on in local centres.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
What’s your point? I didn’t see any suggestion the government should take Wainuiototo without compensation.
“Do you really believe that the State takes land because of lobbying by construction companies?”
No, I think the state’s road building fad is at least partly inspired by lobbying by construction companies (if it isn’t, they are wasting a lot of money lobbying, and I don’t think they are that stupid). And road building often requires compulsory pirchases of land.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
If Owen is trying to expose corruption in his local body, then I wish him all the best.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
The exposure of corruption takes political will by the policy makers AND the judiciary.
Without that will, the official line is that there is no corruption in New Zealand. End of story.
When I took the Whangamata marina society developers to court for exterminating a rare species habitat with weed spray, the method was ignored and the biased judge allowed a character assassination of my star witness, Dr Keith Corbett M.B.E. to proceed. Keith has now gone back to Britain and is quite happy to speak about 100% pure NZ to anyone who cares to listen.
Although I have proof of delberate misleading of the court I hesitate to go back, because I have no faith in New Zealand’s justice system.
Corruption cannot be measured unless its possible existence is acknowledged in the first place.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
oops! for the sake of transparency I would like to add that whanga.bar and I are the same entity, different browser different login
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
…the owners have no interest in paying for the town centre to be a nice place to visit
You’re saying they have a choice about paying their rates bills?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The campaign has many facets – a bit complex and premature to put them up here at this stage.
Go to this web page by a Legal Eagle who has obviously had enough.
http://www.kaiparaconcerns.co.nz/
His analysis of a letter from the Mayor is disturbing to say the least.
http://www.kaiparaconcerns.co.nz/204167/html/page.html
For example one of the Legal Eagle’s paragraphs reads:
The unit of demand criteria have no legal basis. The Council can debate for hours the definition of unit of demand, justify it at length to ratepayers, draw up a guide and a flow chart, BUT, at the end of the day, it has no meaning at all. The simple fact is that Council botched the legal process for three rating years and cannot do anything about it. It simply does not have the power to levy EcoCare rates against separate units. Any monies paid to Council will have to be refunded.
One has to wonder how many other “targeted rates” around the country have been set up with such apparent lack of care. How many refunds could be subject to demand?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
This is closer to my own forensic work. Something smells here.
Take note of the name CPG. It is a name that ratepayers are going to hear a lot of in the next few months.
CPG are the old Duffill Watts and are employed by KDC as engineering consultants.
Donovan Drainage and Earthmoving have filed proceedings against KDC for in excess of $1 million. The claim is now being heard in the High Court at Whangarei.
In December last year, in a separate hearing, the Buildings Disputes Tribunal ruled that KDC had to pay Donovan’s $417.068.64. Council was instructed to pay up within 48 hours and has done so. We knew nothing about it and nor did the COuncillors.
In respect of that early hearing, the Northern Advocate reports:
The adjudicator, John Green, was highly critical of the council and CPG. More than $200,000 of the adjudicator’s award was for costs.
He added that the management of the contract by the engineer had been “dysfunctional for the purposes of masking and/or avoiding additional cost and expense to KDC and it would seem that this was a prime example of a case where independent expert advice/an independent expert review of the contract design would have been a prudent step.”
Mr Green went further when discussing the issue of a variation in the contract: “I am driven to the ineluctable conclusions, first, that the conduct of the engineer was inconsistent with the standard of objectivity, fairness and impartiality expected of a person entrusted with the exercise of the duties and power of engineer to the contract and, secondly, that the assertions and the evidence of KDC in relation to this matter appears to be simply fallacious.”
And yet KDC continues to employ CPG!
……………………
“Fallacious” is a gentle way of saying that KDC was lying. Not a good look for KDC. Not a good look for one of its principal consultants.
It seems likely that all Councillors were kept in the dark about the earlier claim and outcome of that hearing and the payment of the $417.068.64. And who authorised the payment of the cheque? In a letter in this week’s Mangawhai Focus the Mayor is quick to complain about misinformation and others misrepresenting the facts. I am sure that all Kaipara ratepayers agree with that sentiment. Mr Mayor, please let us have the full story on this unfortunate incident. After all, the $417.068.64 came out of ratepayers’ pockets, not yours.
As late as July of this year Councillor guest began making enquiries about this law suit but in response to a direct question the CEO said he knew nothing about any lawsuit. How could this be when KDC has paid up over $400,000? Who is moving this money around?
It is also clear that Councillors were kept in the dark about the current High Court proceedings that began last week. This is the second round for Donavans and this time they are seeking the actual damages of $1.1 million.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Stephen R
The most successful projects are those where the programme is driven from the bottom up.
IN other words the retailers etc have more faith in their own plans those those driven by others..
From the page of my friends at New Geography (read my piece there on the Economic Significance of Markets) comes this alternative model of community development – A Localist Movement by Richard Reep.
So if a group wants an eco village, or an intentional community, or a hamlet based on Living Building Solutions or a transition town or GE free zone they are enabled to do it totally outside the Council planning framework (or anyone else’s) provided they comply with regional plans protecting the soil water and air and other health and safety matters.
I don’t have to believe in the ideas to support the principle and of course this kind of self driven community is what I was doing in my park at Rangiora Road.
And the owners have now taken over and run it themselves. Unlike the Eco Village I had only few rules because the incentives were built into the economic model.
Read the story here
http://www.newgeography.com/content/001715-a-localist-solution
I like the last two paragraphs:
The important thing about them is not which side they react to, but rather what they are doing about it, and the gradual, step-by-step basis through which individuals and communities can act.
These developments should be watched carefully if a positive image of the future is yet to be regained. Enough destruction has occurred, and rather than bemoan the loss of our past lifestyles and bemoan a future of scarcity, the middle class might look at it rather as a freedom to change and grow stronger, more resilient, and less dependent upon the oligarchy of organized interest groups, academic influence, media money and power.
As far as I can tell there is nothing in the RMA to stop this. Councils and the splanners just have to be prepared to step aside and let communities run their own lives.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Also In The Rise of Sublocal Governance, Robert H. Nelson mounts another attack on the assumed virtues of ever-larger units of local government, but comes from a different perspective and generates new thinking and arguments.
Go to: http://mercatus.org/publication/rise-sublocal-governance
Nelson recommends a move towards a system of much freer local competition in metropolitan governance, taking his models from the rapidly rising “sub-local” units of government in numerous States within the US.
For example the rapid rise of “Home Ownership Associations” presents a major and effective alternative to uniform control by councils and planners and promotes diversity. About 20% of Americans now live in such Community Associations. Business Improvement Districts, Historic Districts, are also multiplying rapidly.
As far as I can tell there is nothing in the RMA to prevent the development of the model of community self governance in NZ. Councils and the planners and engineers would just have to be prepared to step aside and let people make their own decisions about their own lives.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“As far as I can tell there is nothing in the RMA to prevent the development of the model of community self governance in NZ. Councils and the planners and engineers would just have to be prepared to step aside and let people make their own decisions about their own lives.”
……
Property investors are a spanner in the works in older neighborhoods. It is in their interest to draw down the neighbors property so they can buy it cheap, bowl it and put 3 units up. The Property Council have been lobbying for higher height restrictions (and increased immigration).
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
No one is suggesting taking the land by Wainuiototo under the Public Works, a collaborative effort will be needed if the court case is lost to try and buy it back and Crown support would be helpful! The Regional Council should have done this years ago. Interesting comment by Sam about politicians keeping out of campaigns. Before I was an MP I worked with MPs when they were helpful and didn’t try and take over. Ask the people up here in Hauraki/Coromandel if they want political help on mining and Wainuiototo.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
The Public Works act sets out the process for the Crown taking land off private owners for any reason.
Part 8 of the RMA that deals with designations and takings refers to the Public Works as the legislation that governs the process. It does not mean that the land is being taken for a public work.
Of course if the trade is freely negotiated between the parties then the Public Works Act process does not come into it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Record submissions on New Chums, but few signatures on petition
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10670505
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/geoff-cumming/news/article.cfm?a_id=88&objectid=3542864
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/geoff-cumming/news/article.cfm?a_id=88&objectid=3542811
So found these links.
” Regional councillor Evan Penny says Environment Waikato and the district council could buy the property “but it would be the first of a long list” I wonder if EW made any approaches to the govt and if so in what manner?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Any one thing that proves to me that New Zealanders, as a society, don’t actually deserve to live in this beautiful country, it their continued pillaging and suburbanisation of their most valuable and dramatic seascapes and shorelines.
What is happening in Chums beach is despicable. There are many, many beaches already despoiled by development, there is absolutely no reason to despoil the remaining ones.
The problem with Chums beach has nothing to do with “freedom” but all to do with New Zealander’s sheer bloody carelessness in looking after the treasures that nature has endowed on you. I don’t care whose fault this is; the Government, for failing to purchase the beach when they could have, or failing to fund the DoC adequately so that it could have bought it; the Regional Council or the local council; the inability of the country to frame adequately restrictive planning legislation; or the general population, most of who don’t give a stuff.
Indeed one of your own, Raewyn Peart wrote a book about it “Castles in the Sand”. I wrote her a long e-mail, a rant really about this, but I also wrote this shorter letter to Nine to Noon in August last year.
Dear Team.
I was interested to hear Raewyn Peart’s comments in regard to ugly coastal development in New Zealand, what I call the Remuarisation of our coastline. She doesn’t know it, but I am in the process of writing a rather long e-mail to her about this issue following her article in the Sunday Star Times.
I would contend the main problem is, contrary to our green-tinted belief about environmental credentials, and what Raewyn is implying, that most New Zealanders don’t actually care that much about the issue. There seems to be either a resigned acceptance of so-called “progress” or an inability to see that there is a worthwhile half-way house between a purely natural, bush clad coastline, of which very little remains, and the fully developed coastline; this half-way house is a pastoral landscape with farming, woodlots and accessible beaches, which in itself is extremely beautiful and worth preserving. I truly believe most New Zealanders can go to the beach, and not even notice the ugly development that lies behind it – it’s a form of cultural blinkers.
I think you have to alter a mind-set of a whole country, that’s not going to be easy. And for Raewyn to pin her hopes on any changes introduced by this present right-wing and pro-development government is naive to say the least. However, I wish her, and this country, luck, but for myself, I remain pretty cynical.
Yours faithfully,
One of Raewyn’s suggestion was the establishment of a Coastal Commission. Well, I’ve lived in New Zealand 25 years, and I regularly hear calls for such an organisation, even from politicians who actually have the power to establish such an organisation. But the nettle is just too hard to grasp; the New Zealander’s proprietorial attitude to land, an atavistic attitude I suspect that comes from pioneering days, is immutable. Any though that anyone else, even the community at large as represented by a national government, should interfere with one’s right to do what one bloody well likes with one’s land, is deeply resented. Much the same attitude came from the farming community when the Labour administration had the temerity to try to introduce some public access to privately owned land.
So Raewyn had her short time in the limelight, but no-one in New Zealand, sorry, most people in New Zealand, wishes to hear the message; our little shack by the sea is our birthright, right? Well, the birthright now of millionaires, and aren’t their interests just as important as anyone else’s?
But what am I going on about, why should we bother looking after these shorelines when we’re equally busy selling all our productive assets, including the very soil/grass/air and water, to overseas corporate interests? But this doesn’t alter the fact – New Zealanders should be ashamed of the ugliness they’ve inflicted on their coastline, and continue so to do.
The only bright thing on the horizon is global warming and sea level rise, the result being that most of these beautiful beaches will be reduced to mud, sticks and stones, and many trashy palaces will be poignantly incorporated into the debris.
And if this post is seen as anti-New Zealand and anti-New Zealander, well, in this particular matter, it is. And if you consider that I’m a moaning Pom, well, I don’t care, in this matter, there’s something important to moan about – in this matter, I’d prefer to be a moaning Pom than a careless New Zealander.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
I visited New Chums today to look for myself.Yes ,it is a nice beach with a lovely fringe of pohutakawa and nikau but look closely and exotic plant pests are rife and are making the flat areas above high water unusable.The beach needs help and leaving it as it is will only mean it degrades faster.
Sensible development could be good for the beach.
Public road access to the beach is not needed,upgrading the existing track is enough.
Toilets would be a help so people don’t do what bears do in the woods.
A permanent population would help love the beach and discourage freedom campers and day trippers from lighting fires in the tree roots as happens now.
Look for the positives,work together and everybody can be happy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Peter – how did you manage to miss the in-your-eye-with-a-sharp-stick fact that the magic of New Chums is that it is undeveloped.
If you want a developed beach why wade across an estuary, negotiate the angle twisting boulders and the walk across the peninsula? – there’s already a developed beach complete with houses ten seconds walk from the carpark.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)