Why are people ignoring the Rahui? - The Fringe

The Auckland Council has been forced to officially close the Waitakere Ranges. But why did so many people disregard the Rahui in the first place?

For some people, the rahui placed on the Waitakere Ranges to control kauri dieback is a revered and binding directive. Te Kawerau a Maki, the mana whenua of the area told the public to keep out. So they keep out.

This compliance however is not universal. Even now, several months after the ban came into effect, social media is strewn with selfies of people traipsing through the bush and exacerbating the spread of the disease.

An obvious explanation for this is that the rahui isn’t legally binding and while Auckland council has urged visitors to respect it, they voted against officially closing the entire park in December. The public was given a choice, and a huge part of it chose to continue walking in the forest.

This will soon change. Last month the Auckland Council voted a second time to close the entire park in light of the steady stream of walkers and the poor dieback hygiene compliance among them. The vote passed unanimously. The closures come into effect on 1st May.

But why did it need to come to this? Considering the information available and what is truly at stake, why are people disregarding social customs and scientific advice to continue to walk in the Waitakere Ranges?

It may be surprising, but a common reason is that some are simply unaware of the rahui, or the true gravity of the situation.

Aderyn Johnston and his friends went on a canyoning trip in the forest last month. He says that although there was some discussion in his party about spraying shoes and keeping to the trails, the rahui wasn’t mentioned.

“To be honest, it wasn’t something I was aware of,” he says. “I had to look up rahui after you mentioned it. And there wasn’t a lot of ready information about dieback, even at the disinfectant stations.”

Auckland Council alerts visitors to the rahui and kauri dieback on its Waitakere Ranges web page and Te Kawerau a Maki has placed six signs at various entrances to the area. But if visitors miss those, there is little else to inform them once in the forest.

Some independent websites and groups have taken it upon themselves to promote the rahui. On the popular Auckland walking site Epic Little Missions, closed tracks have been marked as such and a message on the home page encourages visitors to find walks elsewhere in Auckland.

“I care about kauri,” says site founder Mitch Smyth. “Obviously I can’t make people stay away, so I can only communicate Epic Little Missions’ view to stay away and do all we can to help kauri recover.”

For other organisations it’s a little more complicated. West Auckland Tramping

Club is aware of the rahui and acknowledges that human activity is the main vector spreading kauri dieback. However, they’ve decided to continue tramping on open tracks in the forest, advising members to obey signs vigilantly and thoroughly clean their boots before leaving home.

The reason for this, explains the club’s newsletter, is the council-provided

Sterigene solution does not effectively kill the dieback spores. They’ve therefore taken it into their own hands to mitigate the spread of the disease whilst still enjoying the walks.

Another recreational group – preferring to remain anonymous to avoid negative attention – follows a similar philosophy. A member says that his group disputes the council’s assertion that human beings are the main cause of the disease spreading.

The group continues to use open walks, but some members decided to observe the rahui and are now no longer active.

“Some are already having doubts about this decision,” says the member. “There is nowhere else in the area that provides the challenge, diversity and excellence of the Waitakere trails.”

Those doubts will soon be assuaged. While the Auckland Council is looking at options to legally restrict or prosecute people who enter a closed walk, the Ministry for Primary Industries has outlined plans to implement a CAN (Controlled Area Notice) under the Biosecurity Act. While the CAN cannot ban people from a particular track, it can restrict the movement of at risk material – including soil – in and out of an area. This would provide more enforcement options for closed tracks, including the option of prosecuting those who don’t comply with the right hygiene standards.

While the rahui was for the protection of the forest, without enforcement it relied almost completely on the cultural integrity of visitors. It allowed the luxury of choice. For whatever reasons people had for choosing to disregard it, come 1st May, that choice will start having consequences.