The failure to adequately recognise or protect the three pa sites on the domain illustrates the board’s mismanagement. These pa sites are of national significance, and of great significance to local Maori. They are all accessible to the public, some as pa sites, others as car parks and roads, tracks and firebreaks. The attitude of various boards and of the government has been to pay lip service to their archaeological significance but do little, if anything to protect them from further damage. This is despite the fact that they had been notified of their national importance by a number of archaeologists over the years. There is no evidence to suggest that there was any consultation with the local tangata whenua as to the significance of these sites, or the best way to protect and preserve them. When questioned about damage to sites, local administrators talked in terms of embarrassment, rather than expressing any regret. They made no mention of their professional and legal responsibilities, or any moral duty to protect these sites for Maori or other New Zealanders.

A change in the direction of domain management took place in the 1990s. This new approach reflected the recently passed Resource Management Act. A pohutukawa planting project, and a pingao planting and harvesting project, were approved.

In 1995 the site of a new toilet block for Anzac Bay came under discussion Concern had been expressed by the marae about any future site for the toilets. The marae stated that the present site endangered a valuable kai moana resource. Local council engineering staff were also concerned about the possibility of sewerage seepage. Alternative sites were presented at local meetings. The reserves technical officer believed the toilets should be moved further inland. After consulting on the basis of using an alternative site, it was then decided to construct the new block on the site of the existing toilet. The decision ran contrary to the expert advice the board had sought from the council, and the expressed wishes of Otawhiwhi Marae.

In 1991 the Waihi Volunteer Coastguard applied for a site to build clubrooms in the domain. Two sites were identified. Their preferred site was actually in Anzac Bay, however, which was neither of the two sites subject to public discussion. The Maori liaison officer consulted with a number of local Maori concerning the cultural significance of the two proposed sites. All those consulted said that they had no problems with either of the two sites. In December the coastguard met with the Otawhiwhi Marae committee in an attempt to gain their support for the Anzac Bay site. The marae declined their support, and the coastguard proceeded with plans to obtain this site without informing the marae that they intended to do so. The marae vigorously opposed this application. The local newspaper argued that building on the site would be particularly difficult considering public feeling and legislative requirements to protect the character of the reserve. The coastguard did not gain approval for the Anzac Bay site, and were granted one of the two sites originally proposed.

The most recent examples of decision making over the use of the Bowentown Domain include the input of local Maori, even if the Maori preferences were not always granted. However, throughout most of the history of the domain Maori remain invisible in the written record of its administration. Decisions were made which significantly altered the physical attributes of the domain, including pa sites and urupa, without any reference to Maori. This clearly illustrates the contention that the