Maara Roa

Kapi-Mana News - - OPINION -


Con­grat­u­la­tions to the artists and Porirua City Coun­cil for the new mu­rals at Porirua Rail­way Sta­tion. What a change from the dingy walls of the past.

Also, I am de­lighted to see the woman from the Long Gar­den or early set­tler times de­picted here, for the story is a fine leg­end for the city to hon­our.

The name Maara Roa, how­ever, is not the name for the Maori maiden but is com­mon te reo Maori for a gar­den – a pro­tected valu­able area of grow­ing things, pos­si­bly cul­ti­vated (mara or maara), with the word roa mean­ing long. This was how the woman’s gar­den be­came known to peo­ple at the time.

The woman’s name is in fact un­known, while the name Maara Roa was given in 2000 by the late Alf Po­taka, kau­matua of Maraeroa Marae, to the then-new con­ser­va­tion or­gan­i­sa­tion Nga Hoa o Maara Roa, the Friends of Maara Roa, as they set out to re­store and pro­tect the threat­ened na­tive bush rem­nant in the Can­nons Creek Val­ley.

The area in­volved in this is 200 hectares, and the val­ley is al­most five kilo­me­tres long, so this is in­deed a long gar­den.

The re­serve in which this ‘‘long gar­den’’ of bush and stream is be­ing re­stored is Bel­mont Re­gional Park, which at over 300ha, cov­ers most of the Bel­mont hills be­tween Porirua, Welling­ton and Lower Hutt cities, and gives the pub­lic free ac­cess to Can­nons Creek Val­ley from Can­nons Creek Lakes Re­serve and Takapu Rd.

One day the Can­nons Creek Val­ley may be called Maara Roa, but so far the only map which shows the Long Gar­den area is on the so­ci­ety’s web­site at

As for the un­named woman of the long gar­den, her story is told at Maraeroa Marae, where the wharenui is named af­ter her gen­eros­ity – Ukaipo Hi­ato (hu­ato), The One Who Pro­vides.

Go see the tekoteko and beau­ti­ful carv­ings there, read her full story, then come on a guided walk through the new maara roa nearby.

SYLVIA JENKIN, Friends of Maara Roa resur­fac­ing, and so on.

This Fri­day morn­ing, Jan­uary 21, is a day to re­mem­ber. It is an ab­so­lute de­light to ar­rive at the sta­tion to see the won­der­ful art­work and lo­cal photo im­ages of Porirua in­stalled in the sub­way.

Porirua should be proud of all this and re­alise how these im­ages are a feast for the eyes.

I felt in­spired and filled with emo­tion for the won­der­ful ar­ti­sans who had wo­ven magic into these works for us to see. Thank you very much to you all. My plea is to let us take care of our Porirua her­itage, trea­sure its value and be­hold the plea­sure it brings to ev­ery­one.

2011 is a year of progress now and be­yond for Porirua.

Thanks must go to all con­trib­u­tors, fi­nan­cial or oth­er­wise, ratepay­ers, ex­ter­nal fun­ders and the work­men who have made this a mu­seum for us to ap­pre­ci­ate daily. KEREHI MA­HANA,


Coun­cil­lors such as Tim Shep­pard and Euon Mur­rell were so out­raged on our be­half, they spoke out pub­licly and were barred from tak­ing part in de­ci­sion-mak­ing. Where is the democ­racy in si­lenc­ing the most pas­sion­ate sup­port­ers of the qual­ity of life in this city?

The coun­cil has al­lowed pres­sure and in­flu­ence from out­side the city to sway their judge­ment in favour of a com­mer­cial op­er­a­tion that is here to make money at any cost.

The pub­lic must be al­lowed to sub­mit ob­jec­tions again or we must se­ri­ously ques­tion if mem­bers of the coun­cil who sup­port the Aqua­com agenda are wor­thy to rep­re­sent our city. MARG CONAL,

Whitby years, and if this is solely based on the num­ber of users then that at least is some­what of a break­through.

Porirua City Coun­cil has known for at least a decade they have been in breach of their re­source con­sent for the dis­posal of ur­ban waste wa­ter. Ob­vi­ously they have placed greater im­por­tance on spend­ing our rates on an event cen­tre, per­form­ing arts the­atre and Smartlinx 3, and over­all nearly 37 per cent of rates rev­enue on cul­ture and recre­ation.

It is pretty easy to see where coun­cil pri­or­i­ties lie. AL­LAN BLOOMFIELD,

Pau­ata­hanui PCC En­vi­ron­ment and Reg­u­la­tory Ser­vices gen­eral man­ager David Rolfe re­sponds: Mr Bloomfield has been part of the con­sul­ta­tion with coun­cil on the im­ple­men­ta­tion of the by­law re­quir­ing own­ers of ef­flu­ent dis­posal sys­tems (sep­tic tanks) and has at­tended pub­lic meet­ings on the mat­ter, so it is dis­ap­point­ing he ap­pears con­fused about the costs.

The pur­pose of the by­law is to re­quire the reg­u­lar main­te­nance of ef­flu­ent dis­posal sys­tems that will pre­vent pol­lu­tion into the har­bour catch­ment area, re­duce pub­lic health nui­sances and im­prove risks to health of peo­ple in the vicin­ity. The new by­law has re­duced the com­pli­ance costs from the pre­vi­ous by­law.

In ac­knowl­edg­ing that there is a po­ten­tial prob­lem of ef­flu­ent dis­posal in ru­ral ar­eas that reg­u­lar main­te­nance will min­imise, the Min­istry for the En­vi­ron­ment in ef­fect sup­ported the use of by­laws by coun­cils to con­trol the prob­lem but did not sup­port a Na­tional En­vi­ron­men­tal Stan­dard to do so.

A re­port clar­i­fy­ing the sit­u­a­tion will be con­sid­ered by coun­cil next week.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.