spinofflive
The road to Aoraki Mount Cook (Getty Images)
The road to Aoraki Mount Cook (Getty Images)

SocietyAugust 28, 2019

A life divided: An immigrant says goodbye to New Zealand

The road to Aoraki Mount Cook (Getty Images)
The road to Aoraki Mount Cook (Getty Images)

After years living in New Zealand with her family, English writer Jai Breitnauer is going home. Or is she?

I bloody love New Zealand. That might not always come across in the pieces I write, but I do. I love Jacinda and our lefty, greeny, don’t-mention-Winston government. I love the people who take their actual furniture on a camping holiday with them. I love bare feet, everywhere, all year round. I love the fact that recently, when my car key snapped off in the ignition at a gas station, the tradie filling up next to me lent me some pliers to get my car started, and didn’t bat an eyelid. He waka eke noa, here, in Aotearoa. I know that now. And yet, we’ve decided to go home, back to that Borisy, Brexity Britain. We must be mad.

It’s my home really; my husband is a Kiwi. My kids barely remember what the UK looks like. To be honest, I feel like a Kiwi now too. I don’t have the passport, but I do have the accent and the attitude. We also have friends here, a great big group of lovelies we know we can rely on, plus most of my husband’s family … Stop! I better stop, or I won’t get on that plane at all.

You see, like many an expat before us – and many Kiwi repatriates from overseas – we aren’t leaving because we don’t like it, or it’s not working, or we think we will be better off elsewhere. We are leaving a good, happy, productive life simply because we have this other life, 18,000km north, and we hear it calling to us a little louder every day.

We didn’t leave the UK because things weren’t working out, either. In fact, so confident were we that we would be back in 12 months, we left everything we owned stored in a garage and arrived in Christchurch with just a suitcase each. Over the years we’ve been here, we’ve developed an entirely new narrative for ourselves – new art work, new furniture, new sporting likes. We own skis now, climbing gear and a kayak. But the rowing lycra and road bikes are gone. We brew our own beer, but picking fruit to bake into pies are memories from that other, more British life.

Inevitably, we’ve doubled up on things. That Rocket Giotto coffee machine sitting in a garage in Bristol, well, we got one here too. We own two identical tents, printers and dining tables, two hemispheres apart. Our kids had two of all their toys – two marble runs, two Little Tykes cars, two sets of Operation and Snakes and Ladders. And now they’ve grown out of those toys, moved on, and we will be heading back not just to a place from our past but to a time long gone; to a brick-and-tile sarcophagus containing our former life – much of which is woefully inappropriate for our current needs.

The UK or New Zealand? That is the question. (Getty Images)

When we first left, we Skyped our friends. We emailed regularly. People sent us little gifts in the post, and even came to visit. That first year, we had more than five sets of people come and stay with us from Europe. But no one from our old life has been since 2017. That’s OK, it’s a long way. I understand. Still, we see snippets on Facebook of the life we left behind. Is that little John starting senior school? Is Helen really graduating from university already? I can’t believe Dean has taken early retirement, when we left he was training for an Iron Man … We’ve watched our friends, like digital voyeurs, as they’ve got married, had children, bought homes, bought another, traded up cars, downsized. One even died. Photos, silent smiles reminding us of shared jokes from years ago, our faces absent from the milestones we always assumed we would share.

Those voices whisper, quietly, at night when there’s nothing to distract us, but the voices of our family in the UK, well they shout. Recently, it’s become a scream. My parents are 70 this year. And then there are my husband’s mum and step dad who live there, plus his step sister and brother, the nieces who barely know who we are. There are the cousins, the ones I grew up with, and also the one whom my husband grew up with in the southern hemisphere, who no doubt grapples with these questions, these decisions, in the same way we do.

We miss them all, and we know they miss us, even if some of them only think of us once in a while these days.

Moving overseas has never been more simple, cheap or more common. According to Statistics New Zealand, around 45,000 Kiwis a year leave NZ on a permanent, long-term basis. With social media thrown into the new global package, at first at least it seems easier than ever before to create a new life while maintaining the old. But eventually you become strained. Eventually you become divided. You forget birthdays, become confused by the seasons, lose touch with politics. But I still wake up at night convinced I’m in my bed in Bristol, convinced the sound of the waves from the west coast beach is the laughter of some students making their way back home. I still sometimes say pounds when I mean dollars, miles when I mean kilometres. I tell stories from the old country to our kids, and they say, “Can we do that one day, Mummy? Can we catch a ferry to France? Can we walk up Scafell Pike? Can we swim in a, what is it? A lido?”

So, now they can. And I’m sure over the next year or so, we will Skype our friends in New Zealand, and some will come to visit. My sister-in-law has already booked her bed. I’m sure that we will get trinkets in the post, and celebrate birthdays over the internet, and feel as connected, if not more connected, with our beloved Aotearoa. But I also know that connection will begin to fade. We will forget the route we used to drive to our favourite cafe, and we will begin to pronounce Tauranga and Taupō wrong. We will see a new baby, or a marriage, or perhaps even a tangi, and our hearts will be there but not our bodies. And I wonder just how long it will be before we hear the voices calling us from the south, calling us back home.

Keep going!
Image: Silvia Scali
Image: Silvia Scali

SocietyAugust 27, 2019

Selling out or just shrewd? Conservation groups go head to head on Māui dolphins

Image: Silvia Scali
Image: Silvia Scali

The New Zealand wing of the world’s largest conservation organisation has crossed enemy lines to team up with two large fishing companies on a proposal to mitigate the threat to a critically endangered species… and other environment groups aren’t buying it.

Wildlife conservation group WWF-New Zealand has partnered with two major fishing companies on a Māui dolphin protection proposal that puts it at odds with other environment groups.

The Māui’s dolphin is the world’s smallest and rarest dolphin – there are estimated to be between 57 and 75 remaining. In June this year, the government opened consultation on a plan proposing four options to protect the Māui dolphin and the vulnerable Hector’s dolphin from fishing-related threats. Conservation groups widely criticised all the options but the day after submissions closed, WWF-New Zealand announced it had partnered with Sanford Ltd and Moana New Zealand on a new proposal it called “Option 5”.

The proposal, which WWF-New Zealand says will “protect Māui dolphins while taking care of those affected by changing the approach to fishing”, focuses on data gathering, information sharing, risk management and education, rather than calling for a ban on set nets and trawling in Māui dolphin habitats, which WWF-NZ has done in the past. Both Greenpeace and Forest & Bird advocate such a ban.

In a piece published on The Spinoff in May this year, WWF-New Zealand chief executive Livia Esterhazy wrote: “We’re calling on this government to do what is necessary to protect the remaining Māui dolphins and allow them to thrive. This must include banning all set nets and conventional trawling within their habitats”. 

For close to two years, the WWF-New Zealand website has also hosted a pre-populated online submission form for supporters to petition the government to end set-netting and trawling in the Māui dolphin habitats.

Livia Esterhazy and Kevin Hague, chief executives of WWF-New Zealand and Forest & Bird(Photos: Supplied)

On Friday Esterhazy told The Spinoff that WWF-New Zealand stood by its earlier position, but the organisation was trying “a new approach”. She said more than 10,000 people had submitted the online form, which was going directly to the government, but the organisation had realised a “middle ground” was needed so the government wasn’t stuck with “two extremes” – the fishing industry opposed to regulation at one end and conservation groups calling for a ban at the other.

“When the consultation document came out it was clear to us there was going to be two factions and the government was going to have to try to negotiate, and you’d have both ends of the spectrum fighting with each other,” Esterhazy said.

“What we’re trying to do is negotiate with the fishing industry and come up with a plan so the government’s not stuck with the two extremes.

“This is the fifth time the threat management plan has gone round for consultation and [Māui dolphins] are still hugely threatened. We just want to see action and that’s why we’re trying, on top of everything else, this new approach.”

Following the announcement of Option 5, Forest & Bird and Greenpeace urged the government to reject WWF-New Zealand’s proposal, with both organisations putting out press releases saying the plan was based on complicated and unproven methods.

Greenpeace labelled the WWF-NZ proposal the “Sanford plan” and said it was a danger to Māui and Hector’s dolphins, while in the Forest & Bird statement, chief executive Kevin Hague said: “New Zealanders don’t want to gamble with the extinction of dolphins. We respect WWF-NZ for attempting to find common ground with some in the fishing industry, but we do not support their proposed option, and we don’t believe other conservationists will either.”

An image from Sanford’s website

On its website, WWF-New Zealand lists Moana, the country’s largest iwi-owned fishing company, as a key partner. The organisation receives $135,000 from the company annually. 

Asked if these financial benefits had anything to do with WWF-NZ’s change in stance regarding Māui dolphins, Esterhazy said that while she could understand why that perception may exist, “I can categorically say that no money has changed hands on this Māui and Hector’s dolphin threat management plan.”

She said Moana paid WWF-NZ to be a “sustainability consultant” to help the company work towards a zero-carbon, low-waste model.

The organisation had never received any funding from Sanford, Esterhazy said.

WWF-New Zealand had worked with Sanford and Moana, the two biggest commercial fishing companies operating in the Māui dolphin habitat area off the west coast of the North Island, on a protection plan that was released in 2016 and on which the new proposal builds. 

“They committed to stop set netting and transition to dolphin-safe fishing by 2022, and they have been voluntarily shifting all their gear to either long-lining or other dolphin-safe methods,” said Esterhazy.

“Sanford and Moana do not have to do this – they could have sat on their 2016 Māui dolphin protection plan and said ‘that’s good enough thank you very much’, but we were the ones that called them and said ‘yeah nah, can we try to push this even further, can we do something more?’,” said Esterhazy.

“And they stood up to that, they stepped up to the plate and went OK, let’s see what that would look like. It’s been hard work and no money.”

Submissions on the Māui dolphin protection plan are now being analysed and decision documents are expected to be provided to ministers in October.