PUNAKAIKI: This fortress built by nature for herself

Forest and Bird, Volume 16, Issue 1, 1 February 1985, Unnumbered Page

PUNAKAIKI: This fortress built by nature for herself

by

Nicky Hager

nyone who spends time around the Western Paparoas cannot help but develop a special affection for the curious jumble of landscapes in this relatively small area. From the sculptured coastline and spectacular coastal bluffs through to the limestone canyons and out into the wide forests and mountains beyond, a visitor can discover a beautiful and unexpected world during a day-walk from the main coast road between Westport and Greymouth on the West Coast. The limestone geology is the key to the landscape. Limestone provides fertility for the rich forests; it has dissolved to form a landscape of sink holes, disappearing streams and marvellous caves; it has been cut away forming the towering canyons which make the area so accessible; and, where the sea has worn into the stratified limestone on the coast, if has formed into the remarkable Pancake Rocks at Punakaiki for which this area is best known. The limestone has also served to protect its own domain. In an area where most native forest was lost as early as the gold mining days, the tall limestone coastal escarpments have so far held back the loggers from the forests behind. This is why the area is the centre of much discussion at present: it not only provides an opportunity for the creation of New Zealand’s 11th national park — a park based on lowland country to complement the various mountainous parks — but is also viewed as a possible source of timber for the nearby Tauranga Bay sawmill. The idea of a national park in this region first surfaced in 1976 and immediately met with controversy. While conservation and recreation groups strongly promoted the proposal, other groups denounced it as an unjustified ‘‘locking up’’ of much needed West Coast resources. The current proposal is for a 28,000 ha Punakaiki National Park, a reduced version of the original plans. From the point of view of national park supporters, it has always been possible to justify a park by its national importance. But from a West Coaster’s point of view, the question ‘‘what’s in it for the local people?’? has remained unanswered. The answer to this now seems to be tourism.

The West Coast has a history of exploitation of natural resources for distant markets with little left to show for it but mining tailings, pakihi swamp and cutover forest. An important issue now for this region, and many others in New Zealand, is whether there is more economic benefit to be gained by leaving the native forest that remains rather than chopping it down and sending it away. At a recent meeting of the West Coast United Council, Budyong Hill of the Buller Conservation Group gave the councillors a different type of argument for establishing a Punakaiki National Park than they are used to hearing from a West Coaster. He argued: ‘‘The Henshall report on New Zealand tourism concluded that 71 percent of overseas visitors aimed to visit a National Park and that 78 percent actually did visit one. The Punakaiki proposal is an opportunity for the West Coast, and in particular Buller, to get a bit more of a slice of the cake’’. Making an area into a national park has a profound effect on how much it is used for recreation. Whereas a Forest Recreation Survey in 1981 found that many people are uncertain of their right to enter state forest land, national parks are widely known for being open to everyone and designed to encourage recreation. The result is that the name "‘national park’’ has associations for New Zealanders and

many overseas visitors which make it the best advertisement a natural area can have. West Coast holidays at present often involve long periods of driving between a few fairly predictable stops. A large part of the reason for this seems to be ignorance of the available attractions. Bruce Knight, a ranger at Punakaiki, estimated that about 80 percent of the people who end up spending some time at Punakaiki have discovered the area’s attractions by accident. After pausing in their day’s travel to look at the Pancake Rocks, they would notice a photo in a display or ask a question and realise that there was a lot more to be seen. With large numbers of people already travelling the Coast Road _ through Punakaiki — but not stopping for long — the key to the economic benefit of tourism is whether they can be encouraged to lengthen their stay around Punakaiki. This is where the publicity value of national park status is important. Once developed, a park would have heaps to offer. Andy Dennis, author of The Paparoas Guide, has described the potential for seven short nature walks, 14 walking tracks close to the main highway and two major tramping tracks in and around the proposed park area. In addition he notes the caving, exploring, hunting and water sport potential. With services like a na-

tional park centre and the high publicity that national park status automatically affords an area, a large increase in visitors could be expected. In practice, the main economic effect of extra visitors comes from extra nights spent in an area because accommodation and meals are the main travel costs. An economic study of the Punakaiki National Park proposal (Stephens and Wells, 1983) estimated that a park would lead to at least a 10 percent increase in accommodation demand in the Westport to Greymouth area. Even a small increase like this, when added to the extra Lands and Survey jobs that would be required, was found to promise some 60 new full-time and part-time jobs in the region. On top of this, the study predicted extra economic activity in the area flowing from the work of park establishment and maintenance. According to ranger staff at Punakaiki: the predictions in this study are already being confirmed. Private entrepreneurs in the area are apparently confident enough that a national park will be established, that a motor camp is under construction at Charleston. County Council approval has been sought and gained for new motels at Punakaiki and land for other commercial operations is under investigation. Visitor interest in the area at present is thought to be fairly constant or only increasing slowly. But the expectation is that with the

boost of national park status the visitor activity will rise rapidly. Providing that minor boundary changes avoid the park conflicting with mining areas, the main objection to national park establishment comes from the Forest Service. It currently administers much of the land that would be put into national park and has zoned part of this for logging. There are some 25 jobs at the Tauranga Bay sawmill which could be at risk with a national park. Unlike some communities, though, which are more dependent on sawmill employment, these jobs represent only about 1 percent of the Westport workforce. At the same time the tourismrelated industries in Westport provide some 10 percent of employment and in Punakaiki already 50 percent. While the contribution of sawmilling to the local economy has been declining for many years, tourism-related industries have been on the increase. The benefits of tourism to the region are already clearly visible in the jobs and businesses it supports. In this context, national park establishment is far from being the ultimate form of ‘‘locking up’’ resources sometime suggested. Instead a national park can be seen as a way of opening up and developing an area for tourism -thereby creating a highly productive and renewable use for the resources. For once, but certainly not for the last time, a local interest in resource development and job creation appears to strengthen the case forconservation. gf