The Family grave site and associated headstones at Jackson's Bay, have suffered severe deterioration due to the exposed marine side
site. At the 2000 Jackson Family Reunion, the Committee was charged with investigating and undertaking a restoration project. Since, there
has been substantial essential background work undertaken on this issue, but without any progress on the actual restoration - see full
background below
Counter
JACKSON GRAVESITE - JACKSON'S BAY
                                                                   JACKSON REUNION 2000 COMMITTEE SEEKS MANDATE FOR ACTION
                                                                                                        AT TE AWAITI  GRAVESITE
                                                                                                                  1st July, 2011

The Family grave site and associated headstones at Jackson's Bay, have suffered severe deterioration due to the exposed marine side site. At the 2000 Jackson Family
Reunion, the Committee was charged with investigating and undertaking a restoration project. Since, there has been substantial essential background work undertaken [see
below] on this issue, but without any progress on the actual restoration.

Feedback is now specifically sought on the following two questions:-

1        Before commencing any work, we seek feedback on who is actually buried at Jacksons Bay. Do you have any information?
2        Whether the Committee should pursue reburial, and erection of a memorial at the cemetery in Picton.

Please give the Reunion Committee your feedback regarding these questions and any other issues you believe are pertinent. Use  the
CONTACT link to provide us with
your thoughts


THE JACKSON GRAVES AT TE AWAITI

At the time of the Jackson Reunion in 2000 a number of family members went on the launch trip to Jackson’s Bay to see the family grave site. You will also recall that at the
Reunion Dinner an appeal was made for the Committee to restore the graves and the hat was passed around to assist in funding the project.

Well, eleven years later the residual funds from the reunion and the donations still sit in the bank account while the goal of grave restoration continues unachieved. Here is
the background.

THE BACKGROUND

The Jackson Family graves at Jacksons Bay are on land formerly owned by multiple members of the Jackson family and currently privately owned outside of the family.

In the period November 2000 to October 2004 a number of proposals were put to the owner to accomplish the graves maintenance but his response was always deferral.
The options included having the landowner do the restoration work. The landowner in 2005 sought resource consent from Marlborough Regional Council to subdivide the
lands for residential use. On one of the proposed lots were the Jackson family graves. The Jackson Family 2000 Committee, filed an objection to the application for resource
consent, citing the graves of James Jackson and his family are located on the land intended for subdivision and no measures were in place to preserve nor to protect the
grave sites.

At the resource hearing in February 2005, the landowner gave evidence that the graves were in a bad state of repair but that he had, throughout his time as owner of the
land, done his best to ensure that the grave site was protected. He also indicated that he was not prepared to allow a heritage covenant to be registered against his land for
reasons of privacy and freedom of the use of his title. The need for protective work was acknowledged. The hearing was told by the landowner "it is almost too late" to save
the graves.

The submissions and evidence of the Jackson Family 2000 Committee, was that the Resource Management Act 1991, provides protection of the graves site as a matter of
national importance and measures must be put in place before resource consent was granted, to ensure the ongoing protection and preservation of the graves site in
perpetuity. At the hearing, the Council’s Planner indicated that if the landowner was not prepared to enter into a heritage covenant, a consent notice should be registered
against the land providing for the protection and preservation of the grave sites. The form of consent notice offered, only went so far as to identify the fact that the grave
sites were located on the land. The Jackson Family 2000 Committee, expected the consent notice to actually set out requirements with regard to protection, maintenance
and access.

During an informal pavement discussion with the landowner following the hearing, we outlined our desire to get maintenance and preservation work planned and
undertaken. The landowner’s position was that he wished to firstly receive the Council decision and agreed to then contact the Committee to plan the next steps. During this
and subsequent discussions, the landowner indicated a willingness to have necessary maintenance carried out.

A subsequent letter from the landowner’s solicitor deferred this discussion and reiterated the view that the family and the Historic Places Trust should give consideration to
removal of the grave site and remains, to a more appropriate location, at Jackson owned property at Te Awaiti.

OUTCOME OF THE HEARING

Marlborough District Council granted the requested resource consent to the landowner and made it subject to compliance with a range of conditions

That no owner or occupier of the site on which the graves are located may undertake any work that could result in damage or be to the detriment of the Jackson grave site,
without the permission of the Historic Places Trust.
Work was to cease immediately if any archaeological, cultural or historic artefact was found during construction.
The District Plan is to include this site as a historic site.

ACTIONS POST HEARING

In September 2005 the landowner advised through his lawyer he did not wish to participate in any further meetings and any previous arrangements regarding access to the
site were revoked.

In May 2006 the landowner’s final proposal to Marlborough District Council was that he would construct a fence to ensure that the grave site remains in its natural state and
he would agree that a representative of the Jackson Family Committee visit the site at an agreed time and date annually to ensure the site is intact. In return he required
assurances that the matter of access and continuing maintenance simply not be further pursued and that the privacy of the family be respected. The landowner was
adamant no further correspondence would be entered into and that this was the final proposal he was prepared to make to resolve matters. Marlborough District Council
declined to pursue the issue.

In August 2009 the Historic Cemeteries Conservation Trust of New Zealand made nominations of historic heritage grave sites in Marlborough Sounds, which included the
Jackson Family graves at Jacksons Bay.

By March 2011 the Jackson Family 2000 Committee had been reduced to two active participants and a series of exchanges took place with officers of Marlborough District
Council (MDC) and NZ Historic Places Trust (NZHPT) to help decide what to do.

Status of the Grave Site

NZHPT confirm the Jackson graves site is an archaeological site and therefore protected by the Historic Places Act, but the NZHPT (indeed like the Council) do not have the
power to require a private landowner to grant access to the site.

It appears MDC may abandon its ‘Heritage Register’ provisions of its District Plan removing the need for landowners to seek a Resource Consent on account of this issue.

The Land and Subdivision

Apparently the landowner has completed the subdivision but continues to own all sites.

Approvals

While it seems we don’t need a resource consent we do need NZHPT consent before undertaking any work on the gravesite.. This requires the scope of work to be defined
and an archeological report on the site.

Restoration and Protective Work

The only access to the Jackson graves at Jackson’s Bay is via private land. Therefore we cannot even assess the work likely to be involved should restoration become
possible.

Restoration and Protective Work

We believe the work would probably involve new concrete work; the removal of the existing ironwork and memorial stone back to Blenheim for restoration; construction of
new headstone; reinstalling the memorial stones and ironwork. However before commencing such work, as a check, we seek feedback on who is actually buried at Jacksons
Bay. Do you have any information at all?

Relocation of Graves and Remains

MDC advise that there is no public burial ground at Te Awaiti. Although there are graves considered to be archaeological sites at Te Awaiti, these are also on privately
owned land. The closest public burial ground is at Picton. We particularly seek feedback from family members on whether the Committee should pursue reburial of and
erection of a memorial at the cemetery in Picton.

Thus you can see the Committee is frustrated in completing its task. MDC seems intent on removing itself from the wider issue of historic burials in Marlborough Sounds.
Meanwhile the site we are bound to protect continues to deteriorate. Indeed the landowner’s intent is to “have the grave site remain in its natural state” (his words). The New
Zealand Historic Places Trust has offered assistance but before responding we need a mandate from family on the issue of relocation of the graves and a check on actual
burials on the site.
FAMILY GRAVESITE AT JACKSONS BAY, TORY CHANNEL
Gravesite photos kindly submitted by Margo Greenville, nee Bragg
JAMES HAYTER JACKSON’S GRAVESTONE

Sacred to the memory of
James Jackson
WHO DEPARTED THIS LIFE
AUG 2nd 1877 AGED 77 YEARS.
THE OLD MAN SLEEPS IN HIS NARROW BED
HIS TRIALS ON EARTH ARE O’ ER
THE WINTER BLAST MAY SHRIEK OVERHEAD
AND MOUNTAIN TORRENT ROAR
YET HE SWEETLY SLEEPS THOUGH THE TEMPEST RAVE
AND THE STORM CLOUD GATHER O’ER GRANDPA’S GRAVE
Pilot Bay, Tauranga