CULTURAL IMPACT REPORT Dry Creek Replacement Cleanfill

CULTURAL IMPACT REPO R T

Dry Creek replacement cleanfill

Judgeford

IN ASSOCIATION WITH WELLINGTON TENTHS TRUST & PORT NICHOLSON BLOCK SETTLEMENT TRUST

CULTURAL IMPACT REPORT Dry Creek replacement cleanfill

TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT OVERVIEW & TECHNICAL DETAIL ...... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF CULTURAL IMPACT REPORT ...... 5 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ...... 6 OTHER CULTURAL ISSUES ...... 7 TRADITIONAL MAORI HISTORY OF THE AREA ...... 7 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ...... 10 BATTLE OF BOULCOTT FARM ...... 15 TANGATA WHENUA OF WELLINGTON TODAY ...... 16 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 19 BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 19 APPENDIX I ...... 20 APPENDIX II – TRACKS AND PLACES IN HUTT VALLEY AND PORIRUA ...... 21 APPENDIX III – SITE LOCATION MAP ...... 22

PROJECT OVERVIEW & TECHNICAL DETAIL

The Project

1. Winstone Aggregates (Winstones) propose to establish and operate a cleanfill on rural land adjacent to State Highway 58 (SH58) approximately 4 kms to the northwest of Winstone’s existing Dry Creek Cleanfill on State Highway 2 (SH2). 2. The proposed cleanfill will be known as the Dry Creek Replacement Cleanfill (DCR). The DCR site is privately owned and currently run as a dry stock farming operation. The site is located within the jurisdiction of the Greater Wellington Regional Council, the Porirua City Council and Hutt City Council. The land will be leased to Winstones as required. 3. The DCR will be located in the lower half of a farm gully which effectively ensures that the upper half of regenerating and mature native vegetation can remain intact and can be subject to potential future protection through stock exclusion. 4. The cleanfill will have an extensive drainage system centred on the main stream in the gully all leading to sediment retention ponds which are designed to retain sediments from discharging into the natural streams. The project will have four such ponds with three in gullies around the site. Fill slopes will be stabilised and planted as they are built up with fill. 5. The site will be accessed through a controlled entrance from SH 58 with a main access road across the top of the fill site. The Environment 6. The DCR site is within the Pauatahanui catchment which has an overall area of around 43.4 km2 and the mainstream length is 9.6 km. The upper catchment has pockets of bush and shrubland with the middle and lower catchment largely in exotic shelter belts and pasture. 7. There is a tributary of the Pauatahanui Stream that runs through the site and joins the upper reaches of the main stream after passing through a culvert under SH58. 8. The Pauatahanui stream and its tributaries like stream in the region have populations of native fish including banded kokopu, eels and bullies. There is some limitation on fish access along the valley, with some perched culverts in the Pauatahanui Stream.

That would mean the ‘climbers’ of the native fish species are favoured in the upper catchment with perhaps including koaro (one of the whitebait species and perhaps the best climber able to climb near vertical walls). 9. The project will not involve clearing indigenous forest or scrublands with most of the area being pasture with some 0.7 ha of manuka shrubland to be cleared. Above the site the Belmont Regional Park which features regenerating native forest is used extensively around the Dry Creek area in the Hutt valley.

Ref: ATL 1/2-151767-F Aerial view of the Haywards Hill Road in 1939. The cleanfill site is in the background of this photo which shows Dry Creek

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF CULTURAL IMPACT REPORT

10. This report will cover the area around the proposed cleanfill site in the Pauatahanui Stream catchment. The area is largely pasture in a gully which has a tributary of the Pauatahanui Stream draining it. Water flows in the area are intermittent with few permanent streams. The cleanfill will fill the unnamed stream gully which will have been culverted to provide essential drainage of the upper catchment through the site. There will be four sediment retention ponds. Erosion control is also important for a cleanfill operation including stabilisation of fill faces and drainage control. The cleanfill operation is large and will need to be landscaped to manage visual impacts. 11. The cultural impact issues around this project will largely focus on potential environmental impacts. The Māori cultural significance of this area relate to events that occurred in the Hutt Valley and Pauatahanui in the early colonial period. Early Māori travelled through the area to get to hunting grounds or while transiting to battles. In the mid 19th century the area became notorious with Māori warriors coming through this area to attack the colonists in the Hutt valley and then escape back through the valley eventually to the Pā at Battle Hill. There were no Pā, kainga or urupa in the immediate area of the cleanfill. The nearest Pā were at Pauatahanui and in the Hutt Valley at Motutawa (Avalon Park). 12. The Māori cultural issues related to this area come from what was happening in the Hutt Valley and at Pauatahanui and the movement of people from one area to another. 13. In the period of colonisation this was an area affected by conflicts both between various iwi as well as between the newly arriving colonists and visiting iwi groups. The land was a major route between the Porirua Harbour and the Hutt Valley. It is still that today. However it was not really a place where people resided, gardened or stayed for any time. There were no Pā sites or Māori burial grounds. The tracks through the site were the most important feature from Māori times. The hills above Belmont were known as Pareraho Hills.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

14. The area for the cleanfill is drained by the Pauatahanui Stream which itself drains into the Pauatahanui Inlet, an arm of the sea. The inlet is one with high ecological values with the estuarine area being home to many juvenile stages of both freshwater species of fish along with many marine species. Pauatahanui Inlet is the largest in Porirua and the most extensive relatively unmodified estuarine area in the southern part of the North Island. 15. The Pauatahanui Inlet is home to waterfowl, both local and migratory waders, with occasionally a rare visitor such as the bar-tailed godwit. The inlet is the only large area of salt-marsh and seagrass in the Wellington region. The quality of the water it receives from the Pauatahanui stream catchment is important. 16. The site is adjacent to part of the Belmont Regional Park being the Dry Creek area. This is largely regeneration forest which has been taken out of farming operations. There are camping areas in Dry Creek however they are remote from the proposed cleanfill site. There should be minimal environmental impacts on the Regional Park. 17. The indigenous fisheries that move up the Pauatahunui stream are likely to be quite limited on the site with access restricted by perched culverts, where a pipe which protrudes at the downstream end making it difficult for fish passage. Fish would probably include banded kokopu, eel, and koaro. 18. The important aspect of the design of this facility is the site drainage system. The object of the system is to ensure that silts are trapped on site and settled out of the drainage water. 19. Great care must be taken in accepting hard fill into the cleanfill site. This means no contaminated material is to be brought onto the site. All contaminated fill should be taken to the main city council landfills which are sealed from discharge to the environment. The cleanfill will be unsealed. 20. Roading through the site will need to be managed for dust control as will the whole site particularly given the proximity of SH 58.

OTHER CULTURAL ISSUES 21. There are no particular cultural impacts from the proposed clean fill aside from the environmental issues. There are no cultural sites within the project area aside from the traditional Māori tracks which ran through the area. 22. The cultural issues are associated with activities that took place in the vicinity in the Hutt Valley and at Pauatahanui particularly during the volatile period from 1819 to 1850.

TRADITIONAL MAORI HI STORY OF THE AREA

23. This is an area where great conflict occurred early in colonial history with conflicts over the New Zealand Company’s sale of rural acres to settlers and the displaced people of Ngati Tama along with those of Ngati Rangatahi and Ngati Haua from the Upper Whanganui River.

1845 painting shows Fort Richmond, beside the Hutt River. Samuel Charles Brees

24. Motutawa Pā extended across what is now known as Avalon Park as well as extending south across what is now Fairway Drive into the area now occupied by the Hutt Golf Links. Motutawa Pā was associated with the Ngati Tama hapu of the northern confederation of Taranaki iwi, along with the Ngati Rangatahi, a hapu of Ngati Maniapoto. 25. The adjacent area in the Hutt Valley gained notoriety with the battle of Boulcott farm in 1846 which proved to be the last battle between the British regiments in Wellington and Māori. It saw Ngati Rangatahi, Ngati Haua and Ngati Tama being removed from settler sections in the Hutt Valley. 26. According to Best, Te Raho o te Kapowai is “a place on the boundary line between Sections 1 & 78 west of Te Korokoro stream.” 1 27. However Cowan2 says the name applies to the lower hills above Petone Railway Station to the north and north-west. Te Kapowai was an ancestor of Ngati Kahungunu. 28. According to Adkin3, Cowan misplaces the location to the hills behind (west of) Belmont. This matter remains unresolved but the evidence seems to go against the Cowan view.

Map from James Cowan, The New Zealand Wars vol 1

1 Best, Elsdon, The Land of Tara and they that Dwelt therein, Journal of the Polynesian Society. Vol 26 & 27

2 Cowan, James, The New Zealand Wars: A History of the Maori Campaigns and the Pioneering Period: Volume I (1845–64)

3 Adkin, G Leslie, The Great Harbour of Tara,Traditional Māori Place-names and Sites of Wellington Harbour and Environs, 1959

29. This ground plan of Te Rangihaeata’s pā at Pāuatahanui shows two rows of palisades, a six-foot-deep ditch, several whare, an open yard and a chapel. The Pā was called Matai Taua. The sketch at lower right shows the outer palisades, which were over 15 feet in height.4

Alexander Turnbull Library Reference: DW-1163

30. A series of British raids on this pā, built on the site where St Alban’s church stands today, forced its abandonment. More than 300 Ngāti Toa, including women and children, withdrew north to a position in the hills east of the Horokiri Stream that is now known as Battle Hill. The abandoned pā was turned into a British military post from which detachments of regular regiments protected the Europeans who settled around the inlet. 31. Te Rangihaeta also built Taupo Pā near Taupo swamp and at Battle Hill

4 'Te Rangihaeata's pa at Pauatahanui', URL: http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/media/photo/rangihaeatas-pa-pauatahanui, (Ministry for Culture and Heritage), updated 6-Jul-2012

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

32. When Maori first arrived in the Hutt Valley and Pauatahanui they were places of dense forest of tall timber full of menace and threats, but also abundant with the all important food sources, such as of large birds on both the forest floor and in the lofty canopy. The river Te Awa Kairangi was not only a major feature in the landscape of the Hutt Valley, but was also the major highway up the valley with waka able to reach around Upper Hutt, before the uplift of 1855. The Hutt River in Māori times was unruly and prone to flood wide areas. The forests would hold the banks however trees would fall into the river. The hills like those around the Haywards hill were fairly inhospitable and difficult to defend.

33. The earliest settlements by Maori in this part of the Hutt Valley were of the hapu descended from Whatonga and his two sons, the half brothers Tautoki (the father of Rangitane) and Tara after whom Wellington Harbour was named (Te Whanganui a Tara). Tara’s people occupied Wellington’s South Coast and around the harbour around to Fitzroy Bay. Tautoki’s people were located in the Wairarapa and in the Upper Hutt valley to the south coast around Turakirae. The population was sparse and mobile, however Pā were established as far north as Pakuratahi. Maori predominantly lived on the coast where the food resource was rich and varied. From the coast hunting parties ventured far inland to draw on those stocks and then returned to the coast. 34. The Upper Valley landscape was dominated by the snowy peaks of the Tararua Range at the head of the valley and to the West, and Rimutaka/Remutaka to the east. The tribes did not dominate the landscape and often simply moved through the area gathering food where required from the forest, rivers, streams and swamps. The Upper Valley was and still is the domain of the tuna/long-finned eel along with the pakura/swamp hen or pukeko (hence Pakuratahi).

35. The nature of the valley dominated by tall podocarp forest finally gave way to the swamp lands near Te Whanganui a Tara/the great harbour of Tara. The valley was and is, dissected by Te Awakairangi/Heretaunga/Hutt River. It was a bigger river before the uplift of 1855. It was deeper and had a more complex and an extensive mouth with many islands and channels bringing together the Waiwhetu, Awamutu streams with the Hutt River to exit together into the harbour. 36. The Māori history of this area is largely about people travelling through the area and at time camping and hunting. Those travelling through the area come from the west coast having travelled along the beaches of the West would head inland with some trepidation as the bush was close and fully of dangers for those who were not wary. 37. The Hutt Valley and Porirua in the 19th century was highly active starting around 1918-19 with the arrival in Te Upoko o te Ika two taua or war parties lead by the ‘musket’ chiefs of Patuone, Tamati Wakanene from Ngā Puhi and Tuwhare from Ngati Whatua in the north. They were joined by Ngati Toa and the tribes from northern Taranaki in what ended up being an exploration of land for possible migration. 38. The taua were quickly followed by several waves of migration predominantly from Kawhia and northern Taranaki from the early 1820s until 1839. These migrations saw a complete change in the tangata whenua both around Porirua and the Hutt Valley. This change was completed by the time the New Zealand Company arrived in 1839. 39. Colonisation as a result of the New Zealand Company purchase of parts of the Port Nicholson Block brought numbers of European settlers. The signing of the Treaty of Waitangi brought the arrival of the new colonial governance and the examination of pre-Treaty purchases such as that of the New Zealand Company. That examination was to lead to a Crown grant to the Company and the allocation of lands to the tangata whenua of Te Atiawa/Taranaki Whanui.

40. The New Zealand Company purchases in Wellington extended to Porirua, however there was a conflict which Governor Grey sought to resolve. The result was the Crown purchase of the Porirua District. The purchase boundaries were only vaguely described within the deed as ‘at the Kenepuru, running to Porirua, Pauatahanui, Horokiri, extending as far as Wainui, then the boundary takes a straight course inland to Pouawa, running quite as far as Pawakataka.5 The Crown grant, issued to the company on 27 January 1848 was for 68,896 acres. Three large contiguous blocks, extending from Arataura to Wainui and incorporating 16 of the country sections claimed by the company, were excluded from the sale. Turton’s Deeds states that 7000 acres were reserved.

41. Motutawa Pa was located in the area currently known as Avalon Park however with gardens extending southward. Motutawa was a Pa occupied by Ngati Rangatahi from Ohura in the Upper Whanganui River. The Pa was also occupied by the Ngati Awa hapu of Ngati Tama. The place name is the same as an island near the mouth of the Mokau River in North Taranaki. It is of note that the Ngati Tama chief from this Pa Te Kaeaea otherwise known as Taringakuri was buried in the Te Atiawa Urupa in Te Puni Street. Ngati Rangatahi who were originally from Ohura in the Waikato and were a hapu of Ngati Maniapoto. They were related to Ngati Toa through the ancestress, Kimihia.6 Ngati Rangatahi were also resident at Maraenuku having been ‘placed’ there by Ngati Toa in the 1830s, however they vacated the area later that decade and returned in 1841.

5 Turtons Deeds – No 22 p 127

6 Hippolite, Joy, Ngati Rangatahi, 1997, Wai 145, Doc H4, p4

42. Maraenuku Pā was located further south on the east bank of Te Awakairangi/Hutt River was also associated with Ngati Tama who had moved his people from Kaiwharawhara Pā which had been overtaken by settlers and their livestock. Ngati Rangatahi were said to have invited Ngati Tama to settle in the Hutt and established a Pā at Maraenuku around 1842 until 18467. Maraenuku Pā now in the vicinity of the Boulcott Golf Course club house. Maraenuku Pā was located some distance north of where Fort Richmond was built in 1845.

43. In March 1844 Crown Commissioner William Spain, was charged with investigating the pre-Treaty claims of the New Zealand Company in Wellington. Spain visited Ngati Tama chief Te Kaeaea at his pa, Maraenuku. Te Kaeaea and his people were cutting a line in the bush ‘according to the directions of [Te] Rauparaha’ in order ‘to divide between the lands of the European and our own.’ Te Kaeaea insisted that Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata had refused to agree to the boundaries set by Spain for the New Zealand Company. To reinforce this point, by the end of May Te Rangihaeata was camped in the upper Hutt Valley with 500 followers.

44. Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata were now divided over continuing Maori occupation of the Hutt Valley. When the two chiefs met at Otaki in March 1845, Te Rangihaeata accepted that the matter now rested with Ngati Rangatahi, Ngati Tama and the government. But he also made it clear he would not allow the iwi to abandon their claims in the Hutt. He sent word to Ngati Rangatahi that he would support them if they were attacked by the Europeans. 45. Te Kaeaea maintained his position at Maraenuku. In early 1846 the new Governor, George Grey, turned his attention to the Wellington region. He arrived with soldiers and two navy vessels. Grey met Te Kaeaea, who promised to withdraw his people from the Hutt Valley once they were compensated for the 300 acres of potatoes they had growing there. Grey was adamant that there would be no discussion of compensation until Ngati Tama had actually left.

7 Cowan, James, The History of the New Zealand Wars and the Pioneering Period, p90

46. Grey then met the Ngati Rangatahi leader, Kaparatehau. Once more the issue of compensation was raised. Once more Grey made it clear that no negotiations would take place until the land had been cleared. 47. By late February Ngati Rangatahi and Ngati Tama had left the valley. Immediately settlers began to take possession of the land. Maraenuku was destroyed and the village's chapel and urupa (cemetery) were desecrated in the process. Incensed by these actions, Ngati Rangatahi and Ngati Tama returned to the disputed land and attacked settlers' property. 48. Some of Te Rangihaeata's warriors took part in the plunder and looting of settlers' property. Grey sent troops to the area and a number of forts were built. In March 1846 a company of the 96th Regiment repulsed a Maori attack at Taita, prompting Grey to declare martial law. The British positions in the Hutt were strengthened in anticipation of an escalation of the situation.8 49. Richard Taylor, a missionary from Wanganui, had arrived in late February to try to negotiate a settlement. He had helped persuade Ngati Tama and Ngati Rangatahi to leave the valley. Following the settler occupation of the abandoned land, Te Kaeaea informed Taylor: 'I thought the word of a Governor was sacred, but now I see that he too is worth nothing in the eyes of his own people’. Taylor received a similar message from an angry Te Rangihaeata, although the chief also said that he had written to Kaparatehau ordering him to return any property looted from settler houses. 50. Te Rangihaeata told Taylor that the situation would be resolved if Kaparatehau was given some land. He urged Taylor to inform Grey of this fact. Te Rangihaeata was reluctant to meet Grey himself as he had heard that the Governor planned to arrest and hang him for his role in the Wairau incident. He stressed that he had no desire to fight.

8 'A line in the bush - war in Wellington', URL: http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/war/wellington-war/line-in-the-bush, (Ministry for Culture and Heritage), updated 24-Jul-2009

BATTLE OF BOULCOTT FARM

51. In May 1846 Te Rangihaeta was clearly agitated with George Grey and was wanting to assert interests in the Hutt Valley using Ngati Rangatahi and Ngati Haua people who had come into conflict with settlers in the area who had purchased the land through the New Zealand Company process which had been examined by Land Commissioner Spain. 52. The action that was to follow was notorious and showed the instability that still existed in the new colony. This battle however proved to be the last major action in Wellington and set the scene for the future.

1846 painting shows Boulcott's stockade in the Hutt Valley by Lieutenant G. H. Page (58th

TANGATA WHENUA OF WELLINGTON TODAY

53. To identify who are the tangata whenua in the Hutt Valley and Judgeford this report relies in part on the expert knowledge of the Waitangi Tribunal who sought to clarify this matter particularly with respect to who is able to claim an interest against the Crown9.

54. The Waitangi Tribunal put the matter this way in terms of all those who have an interest in the Port Nicholson Block, however the detail of their inquiry was limited in this particular area:

… the Tribunal gave detailed consideration of which Maori groups had customary rights as at 1840 to the lands within the Port Nicholson block (as extended to the south-west coast in 1844). At section 2.6.7, we concluded that those with take raupatu were the independent groups who were members of a collective which conquered Te Whanganui a Tara and its environs. The take raupatu, which covered all lands within the Port Nicholson block which were not covered by ahi kaa rights at 1840, gave them the potential to further develop ahi kaa rights within the block.

Those with ahi kā rights within the Port Nicholson block (as extended in 1844 to the south-west coast) were: “Te Atiawa at Te Whanganui a Tara10 and part of the south-west coast; Taranaki and Ngāti Ruanui at Te Aro; Ngāti Tama at Kaiwharawhara and environs, and part of the south-west coast; Ngāti Toa at Heretaunga and parts of the south-west coast” 55. In addition to this, these groups held ‘take raupatu’11 over the remainder of lands not secured by ahi kā and with the potential to further develop ahi kā rights within the block.12.

9 Waitangi Tribunal, Te Whanganui a Tara me Ōna Takiwā: Report on the Wellington District, 2003, p 479

10 Te Whanganui a Tara as used in the Waitangi Tribunal report meant – Wellington Harbour or Port Nicholson including Heretaunga (Hutt Valley) and is now the site of Wellington City

56. Ngati Toa has manawhenua rights at Pauatahanui and up to this site.

57. The Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust has the principal role representing the tribes of Taranaki Whānui within the Port Nicholson Block. The tangata whenua groups around the northern side of the harbour today are from various hapū of Te Atiawa. These peoples’ descendants are beneficial owners in the Wellington Tenths Trust and most are members of the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust and are generally represented by the Trusts today.

58. Although Ngati Toa were said to have an interest in the Hutt through their relationship with Ngati Rangatahi and Ngati Haua who came from the Taumaranui area and resided for a short time around the Boulcott area.

59. Ngati Rangatahi are a hapu of Ngati Manipoto from Taumaranui. There is also a hapu called Ngati Rangatahi as a part of Ngati Raukawa ki te Tonga based at Te Hiiri o Mahuta marae at Kakariki.

60. Ngati Tama ki te Upoko o te Ika are in the process of trying to establish a mandate with the Crown through the Office of Treaty Settlements. According to their website they describe their group this way:

“Some Ngati Tama do not choose to have their historical claims against the Crown in the Port Nicholson Block settled by the Taranaki Whanui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika Settlement legislation. Those Ngati Tama individuals wish to establish a formal body to represent, manage, promote, assist and develop their affairs and interests as descendants of those tipuna who established and maintained the Ngati Tama customary rights held in the Port Nicholson Block from 1840.” 13

61. It should be noted that a large group who affiliate to Ngati Tama are registered and are represented by the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust as well as being beneficial owners in Wellington Tenths Trust.

11 Take raupatu – a right based on conquest, where tribes were displaced by invading groups.

12 Waitangi Tribunal, Te Whanganui a Tara me ōna Takiwā – Report on the Wellington District, 2003,p 254

13 http://www.naumaiplace.com/site/ngatitamakiteupokooteika

62. Ngati Toarangatira are represented by Te Runanga o Ngati Toarangatira14 Te Runanga O Toa Rangatira Incorporated (the Runanga) is a non-profit incorporated society with charitable status. The Runanga is the mandated iwi authority for Ngati Toa Rangatira and is the administrative body of iwi estates and assets. The Runanga deals with the political and public issues of national interest such as Treaty of Waitangi claims, commercial and customary fisheries, health services including primary mental health and residential care services, local government relationships and resource and environmental management.

Existing Dry Creek Cleanfill looking towards the Regional Park

14 http://www.ngatitoa.iwi.nz/runanga/

RECOMMENDATIONS

a. The Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust and the Wellington Tenths Trust (the Trusts) do not see the need for an archaeological site examination for this site. There is no evidence that there is likely to be any traditional Maori archaeology on the site.

b. The Trusts do not see the need for an accidental discovery protocol for this proposed cleanfill.

c. The conditions on any consent for this proposal should pay particular attention to drainage from the site through construction and clearance of the site through to its operation as a cleanfill.

d. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan needs to ensure that the effects of sediment entering the Pauatahanui Stream are avoided or sufficiently reduced. The use of sediment retention ponds, which provides the mechanism for the settlement of sediments prior to water being discharged from the site will go a long way to mitigate this effect.

e. Fill slopes and any exposed cut slopes on the site should be fully stabilised and hydroseeded to restrict soil runoff.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

i. Best, Journal of the Polynesian Society, The Land of Tara and they who settled it, Vol 26 & 27, 1917 – 1919. ii. Waitangi Tribunal, Te Whanganui a Tara me Ōna Takiwā: Report on the Wellington District, 2003 iii. Turton, H Hanson, An Epitome of Official Documents relative to Native Affairs and Land Purchases in the North Island of New Zealand, Government Printer, 1883 iv. Best, Elsdon, Porirua – and they who settled it, serialized in Canterbury Times, commencing March 1914

APPENDIX I

Lance Hall Map reconstructed of the Hutt Valley from 1848 records drawn in 1948

APPENDIX II – TRACKS AND PLACES IN HUTT VALLEY AND PORI RUA

From Waitangi Tribunal, Te Whanganui a Tara me Ōna Takiwā: Report on the Wellington District, 2003, p 197. Note the track going through the valley from Dry Creek.

APPENDIX III – SITE LOCATION MAP