A dispute over earthworks conducted on culturally significant land in Northland has unfolded in the Environment Court at Whangārei, highlighting tensions between heritage preservation and land development. The case involves Valentina Trustees, a Christchurch-based company that acquired a 70-hectare property stretching from the Hihi Peninsula to west of Taemaro in 2020. The site includes one of the most important maunga (mountains) to Muriwhenua and Ngāti Kahu descendants, featuring 136 recorded sites of cultural importance among a total of 948 archaeological sites mapped within the property boundaries.

In 2022, contractors working for Valentina Trustees undertook earthworks on the maunga, widening walking tracks and clearing vegetation at the summit. Local residents alerted Heritage New Zealand, leading to an order to halt the works and a subsequent investigation. The Ministry of Heritage has charged Valentina Trustees with modifying an archaeological site without the necessary authority, alleging the company knew or should have reasonably suspected that the land included protected sites.

At the recent hearing, Crown lawyer Shawn McManus stated that six archaeological sites had been damaged due to the earthworks, although only two were officially recorded. The affected features reportedly include stone mounds, ovens, pits, terraces, and the Taranga Pā. McManus pointed out that the property’s Land Information Memorandum (LIM) report flagged the presence of historic sites and emphasized the need for Heritage New Zealand’s approval before any works commenced. According to the Crown, this information placed the landowners on notice about the potential archaeological sensitivity of the area.

However, Environment Court Judge Jeff Smith expressed caution regarding the Crown’s position, noting the widespread presence of archaeological sites across Northland as a result of extensive Māori and European settlement and modification over time. “It can’t be the case that Heritage New Zealand has to grant a consent for all earthworks that are conducted in Northland,” Judge Smith remarked, highlighting the challenges posed by such expansive protections.

Valentina Trustees denies knowledge that the work required Heritage New Zealand’s consent or that the areas were archaeological sites. During the hearing, Sandra Heihei, a local kaitiaki and descendant with whakapapa ties to the maunga, provided testimony of the physical impact observed during post-earthworks assessments. Heihei described seeing large parts of the pā summit removed and significant changes to the landscape, describing the cultural damage as profound. She accompanied archaeologists during site inspections and identified discolorations in the clay indicative of ancient fires, affirming oral histories handed down through generations as tangible evidence of the ancestors’ presence.

Several archaeologists also gave evidence. Northern senior archaeologist for Heritage New Zealand, Dr James Robinson, emphasized the density of heritage sites in the region, underscoring that sites of Māori origin such as pā, garden terraces, and pit sites are legally protected and require Heritage New Zealand’s involvement before any disturbance. Robinson stated that no prior notification or application for authority had been received from the landowners for the earthworks in question.

Justin Maxwell, an independent archaeologist who conducted a site assessment after the damage was reported, testified that the area contained clear signs of habitation, including fire-cracked rocks and evidence of earth ovens. He confirmed damage to two pā sites, with one completely leveled, and indicated that the scale of earthworks might reveal further unrecorded sites.

The Environment Court has reserved its decision, with judgment expected later this month. The outcome will have implications for the management of archaeological sites in heavily modified regions of Northland where development pressures intersect with cultural heritage.