I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of theCatchment Operations Committee will be held on:
Date: Wednesday, 10 August 2016 Time: 9.00am Venue: Tararua Room Horizons Regional Council 11-15 Victoria Avenue, Palmerston North
CATCHMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
AGENDA
MEMBERSHIP
Chair Cr MC Guy Deputy Chair Cr JJ Barrow Councillors Cr LR Burnell, QSM Cr DB Cotton Cr EB Gordon (ex officio) Cr RJ Keedwell Cr PJ Kelly JP Cr GM McKellar Cr DR Pearce Cr PW Rieger QSO JP Cr BE Rollinson Cr CI Sheldon
Michael McCartney
Chief Executive
Contact Telephone: 0508 800 800 Email: [email protected] Postal Address: Private Bag 11025, Palmerston North 4442
Full Agendas are available on Horizons Regional Council website www.horizons.govt.nz
Note: The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted. Items in the agenda may be subject to amendment or withdrawal at the meeting.
for further information regarding this agenda, please contact: Julie Kennedy, 06 9522 800
CONTACTS 24 hr Freephone : [email protected] www.horizons.govt.nz 0508 800 800
SERVICE Kairanga Marton Taumarunui Woodville CENTRES Cnr Rongotea & Hammond Street 34 Maata Street Cnr Vogel (SH2) & Tay Kairanga-Bunnythorpe Rds, Sts Palmerston North
REGIONAL Palmerston North Whanganui HOUSES 11-15 Victoria Avenue 181 Guyton Street
DEPOTS Levin Taihape 11 Bruce Road Torere Road Ohotu
POSTAL Horizons Regional Council, Private Bag 11025, Manawatu Mail Centre, Palmerston North 4442 ADDRESS FAX 06 9522 929
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Apologies and Leave of Absence 5
2 Public Speaking Rights 5
3 Supplementary Items 5
4 Members’ Conflict of Interest 5
5 Confirmation of Minutes Catchment Operations Committee meeting, 15 June 2016 7
6 River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Report No: 16-152 15 Annex A - Schedule of Completed Wokrs 1 June - 31 July 2016 44
7 Summary on the Awarua FLood Mitigation Investigations Report (PRD 05 36) Report No: 16-153 55
8 Economic Impacts of the June 2015 Flood on the Whanganui Urban Area (PRD 05 36) Report No: 16-154 57 Annex A - June 2015 Whanganui Flood - Schedule of Costs 61
9 Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Report No: 16-155 63 Annex A - SLUI Target Parcels 73 Annex B - SLUI Overview and Plan Progress 74 Annex C - SLUI Mapped Priority Land 75 Annex D - SLUI Works Tracking 76
10 Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Report No: 16-156 77 Annex A - Regional Coast and Land Operational Plan 2016-17 79 Annex B - SLUI Operational Plan 2016-17 101 Annex C - Whanganui Catchment Strategy Operational Plan 2016-17 133
11 Regional Coast and Land Report No: 16-157 153
12 Whanganui Catchment Strategy Report No: 16-158 159
13 Members’ Questions
Page 3
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
AGENDA
1 Apologies and Leave of Absence At the close of the Agenda no apologies had been received.
2 Public Speaking Rights Notification to speak is required by 4pm on the working day prior to the meeting. Further information is available on www.horizons.govt.nz\Council\ or by phoning 0508 800 800.
Petitions/Deputations Deputations: Written notice (fewer than 150 words) concerning the nature of the deputation must be lodged with the Chief Executive at least 2 working days before the date of the meeting and subsequently approved by the Chairperson. Petitions: Written notice to the Chief Executive is required at least 2 working days before the date of the meeting.
Further information is available on www.horizons.govt.nz\Council\ or by phoning 0508 800 800.
3 Supplementary Items To consider, and if thought fit, to pass a resolution to permit the Committee/Council to consider any further items relating to items following below which do not appear on the Order Paper of this meeting and/or the meeting to be held with the public excluded. Such resolution is required to be made pursuant to Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended), and the Chairperson must advise: (i) The reason why the item was not on the Order Paper, and (ii) The reason why the discussion of this item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.
4 Members’ Conflict of Interest Members are reminded of their obligation to declare any conflicts of interest they might have in respect of the items on this Agenda.
Page 5
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Minutes of the fifteenth meeting of the ninth triennium of the Catchment Operations Committee held at 9.03am on Wednesday 15 June 2016, in the Tararua Room, Horizons Regional Council, 11-15 Victoria Avenue, Palmerston North.
PRESENT Crs MC Guy (Chair), JJ Barrow, LR Burnell QSM, DB Cotton, EB Gordon (ex officio), RJ Keedwell, PJ Kelly JP (arrived 9.05am), GM McKellar, DR Pearce, PW Rieger QSO JP (arrived 9.07am), BE Rollinson, and CI Sheldon (arrived 11.40am). IN ATTENDANCE Chief Executive Mr M McCartney Group Manager River Management Mr R Strong Committee Secretary Ms M Boekman ALSO PRESENT At various times during the meeting: Dr J Roygard (Group Manager Natural Resources and Partnerships) Mr G Cooper (Environmental Manager–Land), Mr M Todd (Environmental Monitoring Coordinator), Mr D Harrison (Environmental Programme Coordinator), Mrs M Smith (Communications Officer), a member of the press and a member of the public.
The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.
APOLOGIES
COP 16-150 Moved Keedwell/Pearce That the Committee receives apologies from Crs Kelly, Rieger and Sheldon for lateness. CARRIED
PUBLIC SPEAKING RIGHTS There were no requests for public speaking rights.
SUPPLEMENTARY ITEMS There were no supplementary items to be considered.
MEMBERS’ CONFLICTS OF INTEREST There were no conflicts of interest declared.
The Chairman advised that Item 6 would follow Item 10. Item 13, Members’ Questions, would follow the River Management part of the Agenda and again at the conclusion of the Agenda.
Page 7
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES COP 16-151 Moved Pearce/McKellar That the Committee: confirms the minutes of the Catchment Operations Committee meeting held on 13 April 2016 as a correct record, and notes that the recommendations were adopted by the Council on 28 April 2016. CARRIED
RIVER AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING REPORT (PRD 01 02) Report No 16-121 The purpose of this item was to report on progress with river and drainage activities for the period 1 April 2016 to 31 May 2016. Mr Strong (Group Manager River Management) took the report as being read and highlighted some of the main points. He provided Members with an update on the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM) claim and on the positive outcome regarding the meeting with KiwiRail about the Ngawapurua Rail Bridge. Mr Strong then spoke to a presentation on the Rangitikei Scheme around its classification and where it derived its income. Mr Strong highlighted some of the challenges that the scheme faced and commented as to whether there was appetite for change to the scheme. He noted that the financial position of the scheme largely depended on the nature of future floods. He also noted that the Cross Section Survey of the Rangitikei River, a deliverable under Dr Roygard’s (Group Manager Natural Resources and Partnerships) programme, would provide valuable baseline information regarding bed degradation trends and potential loss of service with regards to flood protection. Mr Strong answered Members’ questions of clarification regarding the viability of the scheme and possible remedies, noting that iterative change and ongoing evaluation of performance was essential. Mr Strong advised that he would take points covered in the Committee paper and Councillor views around possible changes to the next Rangitikei Scheme Liaison meeting for discussion. The Chairman guided Members through the report page by page and Mr Strong provided further clarification on the various activities and projects contained in the report. In response to a query regarding the Tutaenui Scheme, Mr Strong advised that a report covering the audit and flood plain modelling would be presented at the August Catchment Operations Committee meeting and the results would be presented at a public meeting in Marton. In response to a query, Mr Strong also advised that the Lower Kiwitea Scheme Liaison Committee members would be advised on the update to the MCDEM claim. Cr Barrow thanked Mr Strong on behalf of the Tararua District for the work done regarding the Ngawapurua Rail Bridge. In response to a question regarding Giant Willow Aphid damage to pole plantings, Mr Strong commented that staff were gathering information and talking to experts in order to assemble an interim management approach to the threat and minimise any risks in the short term. Crs Cotton and Pearce were appreciative of the report on the Lower Whanganui River regarding the June 2015 flood, noting it had been well received. The Chairman commented on the findings that there was no significant sedimentation in the Lower Whanganui except at the river margins. Mr Strong continued to respond to Members’ questions of clarification. The Chairman commented and congratulated the River Management team on the amount of works completed. COP 16-152 Moved Burnell/McKellar That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-121 and annexure. CARRIED
Page 8
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
ISSUES ARISING FROM ANNUAL RATEPAYER MEETINGS APRIL / MAY 2016 (PRD 05 00) Report No 16-122 The purpose of this item was to provide commentary on the Annual Catchment Community meeting format adopted for the first time in April / May of this year. It also captured issues raised at these meetings and Liaison Committee meetings held earlier in the financial year. Mr Strong (Group Manager River Management) took the report as being read. He commented on the report’s purpose to lift the profile and outline the benefits of the schemes, and to let the community have an opportunity to better understand where their rates were being spent. Typographical errors were noted for amendment. COP 16-153 Moved Gordon/Keedwell That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-122 and Annex A. CARRIED
MAKINO GATE OPERATION (PRD 05 13) Report No 16-123 The purpose of this item was to inform Council on a range of modifications to the Makino control gate structure in order to further improve the operational reliability of this structure. It also touched on the future challenges this part of the Lower Manawatu Scheme (LMS) was likely to face. Mr Strong (Group Manager River Management) introduced the report. Maps and photographs were shown in support showing the amount of residential development that had occurred in the general area of the Makino control gate structure. Mr Strong noted that the residential areas close to the stopbank were not captured by the LMS rating classification as it ended at Reids Line and that amendments might be necessary. The Chief Executive noted it was critical that greater effort be placed on advising district councils around district planning and spatial planning to ensure that new development did not take place in flood prone areas. There was discussion and comment around the importance of the district advice role, district plans and the importance of the Resource Management Act (RMA) amendments. Comment was also made regarding the expectation by urban residents that the flow diverted should be continually increased however the flow diverted was governed by its resource consent. COP 16-154 Moved Cotton/Rollinson That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-123. CARRIED
MEMBERS QUESTIONS
In response to a query from Cr McKellar regarding a property beside the Makino Stream where erosion protection had not been addressed and the likely effect this might have on flood hazard, Mr Strong noted that at the time it was not considered to be an issue however staff had been asked to look at this again and to report on any risks.
In response to a query from Cr Rollinson regarding an investigation into the Ohakune Scheme, Mr Strong clarified that a report had been taken to the July 2015 Catchment Operations Committee meeting and then presented to Ruapehu District Council (RDC) who commented favourably on the proposal. Mr Strong noted that in the new calendar year, following some non-
Page 9
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
statutory consultation with the Ohakune community, he would report back to the Committee with the intention of including a proposal in the next update to the Long-term Plan (LTP).
The meeting adjourned at 10.55am The meeting reconvened at 11.05am
SUSTAINABLE LAND USE INITIATIVE (SLUI) Report No 16-124 This report updated Members about progress on Council’s Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) for the period 1 April to 18 May 2016. Mr Cooper (Environmental Manager–Land) introduced the report and updated Members on 2015-19 contract targets agreed with the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI), progress with Whole Farm Plan (WFP) development and updated Members on the number of hectares treated, outlined in Table 4. Mr Cooper took Members through Graphs 1, 2 and 3. In Graph 3 he highlighted the works completed to date in relation to the mapped farm plan area. Mr Cooper, Mr Todd (Environmental Monitoring Coordinator) and Dr Roygard (Group Manager Natural Resources and Partnerships) responded to Members’ questions of clarification. In referring to paragraph 7.14, Mr Cooper noted that staff would be helping with assessment work and would have one-on-one tuition with the senior surveyor around the survey questions. Surveying had begun with an aim of completion at the end of June to early July. Mr Cooper and Mr D Harrison (Environmental Programme Coordinator) presented maps which provided Members with an update on the farm plan review and five year programmes, and responded to Members’ questions of clarification. Mr Cooper continued to update Members on activities mentioned in the report. In response to a query Dr Roygard noted in Graph 5 that the year 2016 did not contain a full year’s worth of data. Mr Cooper and Dr Roygard continued to clarify Members’ questions. COP 16-155 Moved Cotton/Kelly That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-124 and Annexes. CARRIED
INTRODUCTION OF A CHARGING REGIME FOR WHOLE FARM PLANS Report No 16-120 This item was a follow up to previous discussions by Council around the charging for Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Whole Farm Plans (WFPs). Dr Roygard (Group Manager Natural Resources and Partnerships) introduced the report. He noted the focus on reducing the number of WFPs each year, increasing the amount of works and targeting works on high priority land. Cr Cotton proposed a new recommendation (c). The Chairman asked Cr Cotton to speak to the new motion. Cr Cotton congratulated management on the workshop held in Marton which explained to farmers how the WFPs could be used to increase productivity and profitability. Cr Cotton explained his concern regarding the cost of WFPs where no work had been carried out. He explained that if plans were charged for, then it signalled to farmers the serious intention by Horizons to improve efficiencies and encourage farmers to undertake more work. He explained that the new motion was proposed to commence in 12 months time so farmers would still have 12 months to receive a free WFP. He explained he was not concerned with how much farmers should contribute but stressed the idea of buy-in. He believed that a good partnership began with buy-in. He noted it was a fantastic programme but would like to see efficiencies in the programme.
Page 10
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
The Chairman asked each Councillor to speak in turn to the new motion (c). Cr Barrow compared the idea of charging to the nutrient management plans. He believed that if the farmer did no work, then the farmer should be required to give money back for the cost of the WFP. Cr Keedwell noted that there was no evidence that charging for WFP would change the outcomes. She commented the SLUI programme was changing and after attending the workshops and listening to farmers and staff there was a need to heed their response. If Horizons charged, fewer people might become involved. She saw a need to talk to farmers who were not getting work done rather than putting up barriers. She did not support the new motion. Cr Rollinston expressed his concern over the cost of WFPs that were not achieving anything. He asked what assurance there was that anything from the plans was being undertaken. He believed that it would be difficult to charge farmers once a WFP was done and he believed that buy-in would work if farmers were not contributing too much. Cr Pearce expressed his idea of introducing a commercial arm to SLUI. Cr Rieger expressed concern over the level of detail of the new motion and would require more information before being in favour of it. Cr Gordon believed that the concept behind the new motion was sound and that a farmer who contributed a small amount of money showed that he/she was committed to the plan and would go ahead with work. He noted that perhaps 2017-18 was too early and the resolution could be presented to the next Council to discuss during the next Long-term Plan (LTP) process. Cr Sheldon was interested to see, from a management and staff point of view, how charging would change things. She confirmed she would not support the motion and thought that the LTP was the place to discuss the topic. Cr Burnell thought the topic should be part of the LTP consultation. He explained that he would like to see some charge as a commitment to the WFP, but believed the next Annual Plan was too soon. Cr McKellar confirmed that he would not support the new motion but acknowledged that the discussion had resulted in changes to the programme. He was concerned that a charge would be a barrier to some farmers and he saw the WFPs as an investment for future use particularly where land ownership had changed. Cr Kelly commented that the issue had stimulated thinking and debate. He believed the motion was premature at this time and needed better consultation. If the new motion failed then Cr Kelly said he would foreshadow that the original (c) be reinstated. Cr Cotton then gave his right of reply. The Chairman maintained his independence by not speaking on the motion, and advised the meeting he would put the three motions. He explained the third motion had not been modified because the discussion had primarily been around its inclusion in an Annual Plan or LTP process which would be addressed by the next council. It was requested that the recommendations be separated. COP 16-156 Moved Cotton/Burnell That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-120 and Annex A. CARRIED
Page 11
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
COP 16-157 Moved Cotton/Burnell That the Committee recommends that Council: b. resolves to maintain the status quo and not introduce a charging regime for Whole Farm Plans for the 2016-17 financial year. After listening to the debate, Cr Cotton decided to vote against the motion. Against: Crs Cotton, Pearce CARRIED Moved Cotton/Burnell That the Committee recommends that Council: c. resolves to charge for Whole Farm Plans in the 2017-18 financial year and are to be included in the draft 2017-18 Annual Plan for submission. For the Motion: Crs Burnell, Cotton, Pearce, Rollinson Against the Motion: Crs Barrow, Keedwell, McKellar, Rieger, Sheldon, Guy Abstained: Crs Gordon, Kelly LOST
The meeting adjourned at 12.40pm. The meeting resumed at 1.26pm.
WHANGANUI CATCHMENT STRATEGY Report No 16-125 This report updated Members on progress on the Whanganui Catchment Strategy for the period 1 April to 16 May 2016. Mr Cooper (Environmental Manager–Land) introduced the report and responded to Members’ questions of clarification. COP 16-158 Moved Barrow/Keedwell That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-125. CARRIED
REGIONAL COAST AND LAND Report No 16-126 This report updated Members on progress on the Council’s Regional Land and Coast activities for the period 1 April to 16 May 2016. Mr Cooper (Environmental Manager–Land) introduced the report. Mr Cooper noted that the Supreme Award Winners Field Day would be on 30 June at Nukumaru. Mr Cooper responded to Members’ questions of clarification. In response to a query, Mr Todd (Environmental Monitoring Coordinator) and Dr Roygard (Group Manager Natural Resources and Partnerships) updated Members on the processes involved in the Soil Health Plans. In response to further queries Mr Cooper and Mr Harrison (Environmental Programme Coordinator) clarified who provided Erosion and Sediment Control plans and Harvester plans and how they were monitored. There was further discussion and comment around logging programmes and erosion and sediment control issues. In response to a query regarding Giant
Page 12
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Willow Aphid trials, Mr Cooper noted that research was being undertaken on whether there were varieties of poles that were resistant to the aphids and noted that farmers were concerned about the number of wasps around because of the aphids. COP 16-159 Moved McKellar/Sheldon That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-126. CARRIED
MEMBERS’ QUESTIONS There were no further Members’ questions.
The meeting closed at 1.52pm.
Confirmed
______CHIEF EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN
Page 13
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Report No. 16-152 Information Only - No Decision Required
RIVER AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING REPORT (PRD 01 02) 6 Item
1. PURPOSE
1.1. The purpose of this item is to report on progress with river and drainage activities for the period 1 June 2016 to 31 July 2016.
2. RECOMMENDATION
That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-152 and annexure.
3. FINANCIAL IMPACT
3.1. Funding provision for all activities reported on in this item is either included in the River and Drainage General or River and Drainage Schemes Activity sections of the 2015-25 Long-Term Plan (LTP); is covered by an approved carry-forward of unexpended budget in 2014-15; or additional approval will be specifically sought by way of recommendation in the item.
4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
4.1. Various matters contained in this item either have been, or will be, communicated with scheme ratepayers through their respective Scheme Liaison Committee and / or Annual Catchment Community Meetings. As necessary, other issues will be the subject of media releases. 5. SIGNIFICANT BUSINESS RISK IMPACT
5.1. There are no significant risks inherent in the adoption of recommendations contained in this report. As previously reported there is a risk of the drawdown of an excessive proportion of individual scheme emergency reserve funds for the purpose of flood damage reinstatement relating to the June 2015 event. Realising this risk would require Council’s application for assistance under the National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan (the Plan) to be declined. Although the substantive claims are yet to be lodged receipt of payment for the first claim significantly improves certainty and consequently measurably reduces this particular business risk.
6. DISCUSSION
6.1. As noted by email to Councillors on 5 July, Civil Defence Minister Nikki Kaye has approved payment of the first claim for financial assistance associated with the reinstatement of flood damage arising from the June 2015 Region-wide floods. As previously advised, Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM) staff determined that a small number of items that formed part of the initial claim lay outside the criteria for assistance under the Plan. A first claim figure of $1,661,395 was settled on after negotiations
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 15
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
between Horizons and MCDEM staff on relatively minor points of detail, meaning that the 60% reimbursement of $474,313.80 was received after the threshold of $870,872 was deducted. That compares with the earlier expectation of just under $486,000.
6.2. Receipt of that payment required a determination on whether it should rest in the 15-16 or Item 6 Item 16-17 financial years. A staff recommendation was put to the Audit and Risk Committee Chair to have the payment recognised in the 16-17 financial year; Cr Rieger approved this recommendation. Although this decision has some modest impact on the 15-16 result this is outweighed by the complexities in splitting the MCDEM payments over financial years, particularly with the requirement that the event deductible is dealt with in its entirety in the first claim and given that the shape of the following two claims is still to be finalised. 6.3. Staff have now begun to prepare the second claim, with MCDEM staff already visiting some of the sites that will form part of that claim. A further visit is likely in early August. That claim will cover the entire repair and response cost attributable to the June 2015 event that fell within the 15-16 financial year that was not included in the first claim. 6.4. The second claim is likely to be ready for submission by mid August and will comprise 81 sites with combined value of $1.3 million, around $350,000 less than originally estimated, reflecting both changes in scope from that originally envisaged and the definition of what is claimable determined through the first claim process. It is also likely that the third and final claim will be larger than originally envisaged; the combined effect of the Rural Upgrade Project and the June 2015 flood damage repairs placed some strain on the River Management Group’s resources and as a result less flood damage repair work was completed than had originally been envisaged. Some Rangitikei Scheme work was also deferred pending the outcome of the first claim, allowing for the reserves position of that scheme and the urgency/ criticality of the work. With the deductible dealt with up front in the first claim the MCDEM payment for the second claim should total around $0.78 million (60%). A third and final claim will be made later in the calendar year encompassing the remainder of the flood damage work completed in the 16-17 financial year. 6.5. Much of the operational activity within the River Management Group over the period has centred on wrapping up financial matters relating to the 15-16 financial year and planning for the various tasks/ projects to be delivered in the 16-17 financial year. 6.6. The most substantial physical works deliverable in the 16-17 financial year is Year 11 and penultimate year of the Lower Manawatu Scheme (LMS) Rural Upgrade Project. The Year 11 programme involves further work to stopbanks alongside the Oroua River, various reaches of the Manawatu River and for the Tokomaru River. Stopbanking alongside the lower reaches of the Tokomaru River is regarded as an LMS asset rather than a Makerua Scheme asset as flood levels are dictated by the backwater effect from the Manawatu River rather than conveyance of Tokomaru River flood flows. 6.7. As with previous years, at this early stage in the deliverables programme a number of risks exist with the potential to delay one or all of the constituent parts. Those risks include successfully negotiating landowner approvals/ entry agreements, having sufficient market interest/ competition for the construction work (and linked to that contract prices that reflect some similarity with the cost estimates made) and favourable weather conditions. 6.8. Initial Project Team meetings have highlighted a potential risk in in delivering the upgrade extent contemplated for the Tokomaru River within the time and budget constraints set. The scope of work involves raising the crest level of the existing structure to achieve a more consistent longitudinal profile and largely assumes the integrity of the existing structure is satisfactory for that to occur (avoiding the need to completely rebuild the structure). Little factual information exists in regard to that integrity and the competency of the foundations but site conditions and anecdotal information suggests some similarities with the Linton Main Drain stopbanks; this part of the network has previously identified
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 16
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
integrity issues. Geotechnical investigations have been commissioned which will enable decisions to be made around the scope of the works and that may necessitate further decisions by Council around the scope of the Rural Upgrade Project.
6.9. Staff met with New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) and Horowhenua District Item 6 Item Council (HDC) staff on 14 July to discuss flooding issues at Kuku south of Levin. Kuku Stream has catchment characteristics that generate flood flows larger than a cursory assessment of the stream would suggest. State Highway 1 traverses a discernible alluvial fan formed by the stream, giving rise to route security concerns for NZTA and causing issues for adjoining landowners. The three organisations have agreed to work collaboratively to identify any feasible mitigation options with NZTA appropriately taking the lead. 6.10. Staff met with HDC staff and Foxton Community Board members on 25 July to discuss stormwater/ flood hazard issues facing Foxton, a 16-17 Annual Plan (AP) target. As a result of that meeting Horizons Regional Council and HDC staff are intending to jointly fund a piece of technical work seeking to identify a long-term flood hazard mitigation/ stormwater management strategy for the town, which could potentially involve substantial/ long term capital expenditure. Once preliminary technical work is complete an initial round of community consultation will take place. The consensus of the meeting was that a stormwater pumping station is somewhat inevitable for Foxton, particular when climate change effects are considered. 6.11. The Foxton Loop Working Group meeting scheduled for 7 July was cancelled with the next meeting scheduled for 4 August. HDC are expecting their consultants GHD Limited to report their findings at that meeting. 6.12. Although proposed as an agenda item for this Committee meeting, no further consideration has yet been given to the Rangitikei Scheme since the last report to Committee in June. This is in part due to the imminent resurvey of cross-section lines for the Rangitikei River this summer; trends/ changes in river bed levels will significantly influence the way the scheme is managed. At this stage it is intended to make provision in the 17-18 Draft Annual Plan (DAP) for the compilation of a management strategy for the Rangitikei Scheme, with the intent of better aligning day-to-day operational activity with past reviews, thereby ensuring the scheme continues to head toward a more sustainable management approach. 6.13. Staff have been working with Manawatu District Council (MDC) on achieving stormwater neutrality as part of the Feilding Urban Growth Framework Plan (ensuring further development does not exacerbate flood hazard locally or compound matters downstream, particularly with respect to spillway discharges into the Taonui Basin). The mitigation strategy focusses on floodwater storage and MDC staff have invited HRC staff to meet to discuss how this might benefit the LMS and how it can be progressed. 6.14. Staff have also been trialling the use of a drone (unmanned aerial vehicle) as a management tool for areas of operational activity that have a high criticality. At this stage it is planned to capture the Mangaone Stream corridor through Palmerston North at regular intervals as an added means of ensuring some of the inherent risks (an active stream with narrow berms and stopbanks protecting high value urban/ commercial/ industrial areas) are being adequately managed. 6.15. Council is facing possible legal action from a landowner adjoining the Oroua River associated with the extraction of gravel under consent held by HRC. The landowner contends that this section of the Oroua River bed is private land (access to the site is across an adjoining landowner’s property) and that some form of compensation is payable. Ownership of the bed is not clear but in any event legal advice concurs with the views of staff that the activity is consistent with Council’s river management mandate under the
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 17
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
1941 Soil Conservation and Act. The landowner is therefore entitled to compensation as it relates to injurious affect; in this context that would be land damage - damaging the bed of a river.
6.16. With the support of the National Beekeepers Association, a collective of various crown Item 6 Item agencies have secured financial assistance from the Sustainable Farming Fund to look at biological controls for the Giant Willow Aphid. As previously reported a number of schemes (and in general those facing the more substantive challenges – eg Rangitikei, South East Ruahine) are facing a threat from the Giant Willow Aphid as it attacks protection plantings. How much of an impact will become clearer in the spring. Regional councils from around the country are also funding the research – from a Horizons perspective that cost will be spread across the schemes that stand to benefit from the research. 6.17. The Whanganui Flood Management Review Group produced its second deliverable over this period, a report summarising investigations and analysis relating to Awarua Stream flood hazard. This is covered in more detail in a separate report. 6.18. Following on from the last report to Committee, staff are continuing to work with KiwiRail staff on some of the river/ debris management issues facing the Ngawapurua Rail Bridge. This includes exploring an arrangement where HRC manages some of those activities on behalf of (and at the cost of) KiwiRail. This will require careful management of liability and expectations around response time etc (ensuring that commitment is not to the detriment of core business). The arrangement will not extend to design or consenting. 6.19. Senior/ technical staff recently attended an in-house workshop on rock riprap design and construction. Facilitated by both staff and an external consultant, the intention of the workshop is to improve the level and breadth of understanding across the Group. It is intended to run regular technical training sessions to further develop the level of expertise within the Group. Training has also been provided on amendments to the Construction Contracts Act and the consequent amendments to the form of contract used by Council for physical works (NZS3910). 6.20. On a final note, River Management, Emergency Management and Catchment Data staff have all been involved in monitoring a series of weather events during the period, most noticeable the Makino Stream toward the end of the reporting period. As reported to the June Committee meeting, the Makino Gate structure remains as one of the more significant operational risks for the River Management Group; although a number of recent initiatives have reduced that risk, it is intended to make provision in both the 17-18 AP and the 2018-2028 LTP to make more substantive reductions to those risks.
7. INVESTIGATIONS AND DESIGN
INVESTIGATIONS
7.1. Following the 19-21 June 2015 floods the intensive demand on design resources on both scheme and public matters related to the flood, continues at a high level, but the number of enquiries and tasks is now decreasing. 7.2. The 2016-17 Design & Investigations Team Programme was produced and confirmed. There are 36 separate tasks identified.
LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME
7.3. The oncoming 2016-17 summer construction season is Year 11 in the 12 Year Rural Upgrade Project. Design work is well advanced on planned upgrades in Year 11 of the upgrade to achieve the 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP)
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 18
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
(100 Year) standard with 450 mm freeboard. During the reporting period designs on these works have included:
• Further design levels for the Whakarongo stopbanks. As advised previously,
degradation has caused erosion problems since 2004 and consequently the design 6 Item of the stopbanks has been based on recovered bed levels.
• Design advice on the input on the need for testing of ground and stopbank conditions on the Tokomaru and Linton Main Drain stopbank upgrades. This will need to cover the increased seepage pressures on the stopbanks resulting from the increased head of the raised stopbank in addition to any erosion threats.
• The survey brief was confirmed for the Mangaore Stream stopbanks.
7.4. Design advice was provided to solve the matter of ponding of floodwaters behind the Mangaone stopbank at Richardsons Line. Options for the stopbank at Benmore Avenue were considered and a detailed design solution is programmed for September. 7.5. Ongoing design information has been supplied to the Foxton Loop Working Party.
LOWER WHANGANUI RIVER
7.6. No substantive investigations have been required. However, periodic enquiries have been answered on the findings of the major report prepared on the June 2015 flood.
AWARUA STREAM
7.7. A detailed report reviewing the flood risks and flood mitigation options at the Awarua Stream was presented to and adopted by the Whanganui Flood Management Review Group. This is the subject of a separate report.
TUTAENUI STREAM HYDRAULIC MODELLING AND AUDIT
7.8. The results of both the floodplain modelling and scheme audit were intended to be presented to the August Committee meeting. Unfortunately commitments in the form of additional investigation and analysis relating to the Awarua Stream and the later than programmed delivery of the Light Imaging, Detection, and Ranging (LiDAR) dataset for the Tutaenui catchment means that modelling work is still currently underway. It is intended to report both the audit and the flood plain modelling to the November Committee meeting.
MAKOTUKU STREAM HYDRAULIC MODELLING
7.9. The modelling of the Makotuku Stream and Makara Stream have proved challenging. This is due to the aggressive nature of the streams environment and debris issues associated with the October 2015 calibration event. A sparse amount of recorded flood level information and calibration data has magnified the problem. However, three recorded marks in Raetihi and the Makotuku Stream shows that there was overflow into the sewage ponds in that event. 7.10. This has taken a considerable depth of discussion with the modelling consultant DHI Ltd resulting in a calibrated model being completed. Design runs are due to be completed shortly. 7.11. A separate flooding issue through Raetihi from the interior streams was not within the scope of this investigation. However, the investigation will be able to give a good guide on
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 19
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
mitigating flooding from tributaries between Seddon and Grey Streets close to the Makotuku Stream. It seems likely that channel vegetation clearance will mitigate this issue.
Item 6 Item ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SOFTWARE UPDATE
7.12. Validation checks of updates to the Asset Management System (AMS) software identified some issues still to be addressed by Datacom but other priorities have slowed progress and it is unclear when the update will go live. A corporate initiative considering a more integrated approach to asset management may subsume this matter.
ANNUAL CAPITALISATION
7.13. Most of this period has been involved in the AMS capitalisation process for input into the Annual Report. The process started earlier this year to help streamline audit requirements and ensure deadlines associated with the Council elections were met. 7.14. The capitalisation has involved allocation of $7.2 million of expenditure this year, plus $3.9 million of expenditure from previous years for Work in Progress (WIP). Most of this WIP was for the major projects now completed in the LMS city reach, including $3.3 million for Anzac Cliff rock lining and $616,000 for Turitea Science Centre stopbanking. 7.15. Approximately $1 million of the $7.2 million expenditure this year has been allocated to WIP pending completion of various works next year. 7.16. The resulting total 2015-16 capex allocation to scheme assets amounts to $9.9 million, with most of this ($9.27 million) attributable to the LMS including such major works as the rock lining at Anzac Cliff and various stopbanking improvements for the LMS Rural Upgrade Project. 7.17. Some of the capital expenditure has involved non-scheme assets and has subsequently been written-off (1 July 2016). This included approximately $230,000 for raising Hoihere Road as part of the LMS Oroua River stopbank and $400,000 for Taonui Basin flood mitigation works involving raising houses and building platforms. 7.18. The capitalisation process also involves updating the AMS database for the valuation of any asset “additions and disposals” during the year. In previous years there have been some major changes due to mapping audits and reconciliation with the AMS data. As the mapping audits were largely completed last year there was expected to be only minor changes, particularly due to the June 2015 flood. 7.19. Some significant changes in the South East Ruahine Scheme had already been identified last year due to the inadvertent omission of $1.2 million of assets in the mapping audit 2014-15. Most changes in other schemes were relatively minor but revised dimensions for four major concrete riprap assets in the LMS resulted in their value being increased by $1.5 million. This value is based on the unit rates for rock work used for the 3 yearly revaluations, 1 July 2014, and accounted for most of the total $1.77 million increase in total scheme valuation. 7.20. As a result of capitalisation this year the total replacement value of all scheme assets (including WIP) is approximately $390 million at 1 July 2016.
DESIGN ADVICE
7.21. During this period ongoing design advice has continued to be given to River Management staff, other departments, and Territorial Local Authority (TLA) staff in relation to a variety
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 20
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
of matters. They continue to be mainly focussed on flood related matters as outlined above. Designs completed included:
• Advice on the appropriate use of oversized rock on the Hoults rock lining in the
Manawatu River. 6 Item
• Assessment of the design flood levels at the site of a proposed MDC footbridge in the reserve between Stonebridge Court and Lethbridge Road Feilding. This is a stream with headwaters extending to Mt Taylor with a catchment area of 139 ha. The conclusion was that the proposed footbridge had adequate freeboard above the 0.5% AEP (1 in 200 year) flood and would not deflect floodwaters into nearby houses.
REGULATORY ADVICE
7.22. A substantial but moderated amount of regulatory work was completed with recorded advice provided on 41 substantive matters during this reporting period. The 2016-17 total of 282 matters was well above the 228 in the previous year. Additionally, there were numerous other matters quickly assessed and not recorded due to other pressing priorities. 7.23. This regulatory work involves specialist advice on flood risks and technical reports for consent applications, rezonings and subdivisions including:
• Advice on 22 flood risk and related enquiries.
• The design proposal by MDC to mitigate stormwater that would enter the Makino Stream or Taonui Basin was endorsed in principle. This would mean additional generated stormwater resultant from residential and industrial developments would be fully mitigated.
• Advice was provided on three bridges, two proposed culverts and one ford. This included a proposed culvert of the Waitewhena Stream upstream of Ohura.
• Advice was provided on applications for renewed gravel extraction consents in the Rangitikei River near Kakariki. These fully met previous policy on limiting extraction to mitigate degradation. Progress on the bed recovery will be assessed following the Rangitikei River survey programmed for the coming summer.
• Design information was provided on three separate investigations in the lower Whanganui River. These pertained to erosion repairs and a project on modelling the river mouth by consultants commissioned by Whanganui District Council (WDC).
• Advice was provided on repair works and a suitable fill site on State Highway 4 near Hapokopoko.
8. CENTRAL AREA
GENERAL
LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME RURAL UPGRADE PROJECT
8.1. Consistent rainfall was spread across this reporting period. This saw a gradual increase of the residual flow in the scheme rivers and medium flows in the scheme streams.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 21
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
8.2. The total rainfall for the period (1 June 2016 to the 21 July 2016) has been recorded as: 120.5 mm at Milson Line (Mangaone); 133.0 mm at Cheltenham (Makino); 254.0 mm at Scotts Road (Kahuterawa); 345.0 mm at Delaware Ridge (Pohangina); 537.0 mm at
Makawakawa Divide (Pohangina); and 222.0 mm at Rangiwahia (Oroua). Item 6 Item 8.3. The Manawatu River experienced four flow peaks recorded at Manawatu Teachers’ College during this reporting period. The flows became increasingly larger as time progressed, with the residual level of the river increasing with time. The first being 275.753 m3s-1 (a stage of 2.034 m) on 13 June, followed by 331.777 m3s-1 (a stage of 2.268 m) on 1 July, 307.747 m3s-1 (a stage of 1.907 m) on 9 July and 521.478 m3s-1 (a stage height of 2.989 m) on 20 July. 8.4. The Oroua River similarly had a steady increase in flow throughout June and into July, with two notable peaks. The first significant peak occurred on 8 July where a peak flow of 99.988 m3s-1 was recorded (with a stage height of 2.405 m). The second significant peak occurred on 20 July and saw a flow of 63.824 m3s-1 (a stage height of 2.018 m). 8.5. The Mangaone Stream had four significant peaks, spread evenly across the recorded time frame. Despite the peak flows occurring, the residual flow of the stream did not appear to be significantly affected. The first peak was experienced on 13 June with a flow of 15.338 m3s-1 (stage height of 1.855 m), the second flow reached a maximum of 17.134 m3s-1 (stage height of 1.951 m) on 13 June, the third flow was recorded as 11.770 m3s-1 (stage height of 1.652 m) on 14 July, and the last recorded peak flow occurred on 20 July with a flow of 10.630 m3s-1 (stage height of 1.581 m). 8.6. The Makino Stream had two significant peak flows in June and a comparatively consistent flow throughout July. The residual flow of the Makino Stream remained reasonably steady despite the peak flows. The first peak flow occurred on 13 June with a flow of 3.909 m3s-1 (stage height of 1.044 m), the second peak flow occurred on 29 June where a flow of 6.383 m3s-1 was recorded (stage height of 1.187 m). 8.7. The Tokomaru Stream had one significant peak late in July and otherwise had several insignificant peaks in June and early July, with the residual flow of the stream remaining fairly consistent throughout the reporting period. The significant flow peak was recorded on 20 July with a flow of 70.697 m3s-1 (stage height of 2.942 m). 8.8. The Kiwitea Stream’s flow fluctuated throughout June and July, with five evenly spaced flow peaks recorded. The first peak flow occurred as part of an event that spanned from May, the flow was recorded on 1 June at 9.665 m3s-1 (stage height of 1.312 m), the second occurred on 13 June with a flow of 8.890 m3s-1 (1.286 m stage height), the third on 29 June with a flow of 9.787 m3s-1 (1.316 m stage height), the fourth of 7.977 m3s-1 (1.254 m stage height) on 13 July, and the fifth peak occurred on 20 July with a flow of 7.162 m3s-1 (stage height of 1.224 m). 8.9. Scheme engineers have continued to assist in the delivery of the Rural Upgrade Project. design work for a concrete floodwall in the Taonui Basin this has now been completed and planning is underway for completion of the scheduled 2016-2017 Rural Upgrade Project works. Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) inspections will be continuing for all culverts located within Rural Upgrade Project work programme area, to identify any repairs or renewals that can be done by the scheme during the upgrade works. 8.10. During this period, scheme staff continued to provide advice to ratepayers and other authorities with regard to the One Plan. These have included small enquiries and site visits, as well as compliance issues. 8.11. Annual inspections have now been completed by scheme staff. These were carried out from April – June and the results of these are currently being incorporated into the AMS, with the Geographic Information System (GIS) asset maps also to be updated. The
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 22
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
results of these annual inspections help in forming the maintenance programs for the coming year. 8.12. Training attended by scheme staff include: first aid course refreshers and a workshop run
by the Concrete Pipe Association of Australasia. The concrete pipe course comprised of a Item 6 Item brief overview of current concrete pipe standards, as well as basic industry best practice methods and common causes of faults and failures.
LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME
8.13. Works undertaken on the various rivers within the scheme during this period include the following:
MANAWATU RIVER
8.14. Maintenance throughout the city reach is continuing where possible, however this time of year is often quiet. Annual inspections have been completed along with drain debris clearing and graffiti removal. 8.15. Scheme engineers have been assisting PNCC with He Ara Kotahi, the shared path that will run along the Manawatu River, and the Kahuterawa and Turitea Streams. Staff assisted by undertaking site visits, and providing advice regarding runoff, along with small design changes to reduce ongoing maintenance, such as removal of small culverts in favour of contouring the ground. Discussions on future developments along the pathway, such as planting plans, have also been discussed. 8.16. Waitoetoe Park has been a topic of discussion and development for several years. Scheme staff are currently working with PNCC, members of Horizons’ Natural Resources and Partnerships Team and interested local community groups, such as Friends of Waitoetoe Park, to assist in the development of an overall plan for the area. A meeting was held at Waitoetoe Park on 22 July with Friends of Waitoetoe Park, Horizons’ staff and a member of PNCC. This meeting was held with the purpose of consulting with the community group and for them to generate a ‘wish list’ for the parks’ development. Horizons’ staff talked about the importance of managing berm flows to avoid erosion, and vegetation management so that it would not adversely affect the flood carrying capacity of the channel. Senior technical staff are intending to discuss this matter in more detail with a view to enabling better precision around what the scope for enhancement work might be. 8.17. Scheme staff have continued maintenance tasks along the river, floodway and around the Moutoa Sluice Gates and Tower. These included inspecting and clearing floodgates and apron area, spraying the lime caps of the gate piers and cleaning drains. Due to ground conditions mowing was not undertaken this reporting period. 8.18. Significant erosion damage remains in the Ashhurst Domain area upstream from the Road Bridge. If left unchecked, this erosion will cause the river to adopt an undesirable meander pattern and cause erosion downstream. At the time of writing, a contractor is onsite undertaking tied tree work in an attempt to hold, or at least reduce, the amount of loss through winter until a more permanent solution can be found. An aerial drone flight is being arranged to fly over the area later in the year to provide clearer information on current river alignments and assist in identifying what the most cost-effective management approach is. 8.19. The June 2015 event caused significant damage along the banks at Hoults yard in Aokautere, where recently constructed bank protection works were destroyed as a result of weakening of the upstream berm caused by a slip. The repair works have been designed and the contract awarded. The placement contract for Hoults is awaiting suitable weather
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 23
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
conditions to commence, and given the present weather conditions, is highly unlikely to proceed before spring. 8.20. The concrete riprap that was stockpiled on Van Echten’s property, opposite the Hoults
yard, has been placed. Bank protection works that were recently completed at Sproull’s Item 6 Item property in Aokautere are holding up well to recent freshes. 8.21. Slumping of topsoil has occurred in some places along the newly upgraded stopbank in Rangiotu. This was a result of very heavy rain events experienced soon after completion and is not being claimed as a defect of the contract works. The defects liability period for this contract expires 9 August. It has been agreed with the landowner, Robert Ervine, that remedial works will be completed by the scheme once ground conditions allow. Repair works undertaken in wet winter conditions may leave the site more vulnerable due to compaction issues and limited vegetation growth. An updated design has been completed for the remaining floodwall as part of this same upgrade and is scheduled to be installed early in the coming construction season. 8.22. A wake boarding park is currently under construction behind the Foxton Loop stopbanks, at the south end of the township. The proximity of this development to the stopbanks and the criticality of this part of the network has caused concern regarding potential impacts on stopbank integrity. Geotechnical engineers from Wellington-based engineering consultant firm DamWatch have been engaged to assist Council in more accurately quantifying that impact. 8.23. Staff have been dealing with an accretion claim on the left bank of the Manawatu River, near Aokautere. Along with current asset records, historical aerial photographs have been obtained from both the Horizons’ library and Archives Central to assist in determining whether or not the land had been added to the river bank by the process of accretion or by the occurrence of avulsion. In some areas it would be preferable to retain an esplanade strip or reserve to allow room for future river channel migration to occur. This would reduce the confinement of the river and the potential for significant protection works in the future. Currently there are no provisions for this kind of arrangement to occur.
OROUA RIVER
8.24. Asset inspections have been completed on the Oroua River for April-June, which will drive next year’s works programme. Nine sites were identified as requiring repair works, and two additional sites were identified as requiring capital expenditure. 8.25. The raising of the stopbank at Saunders’ property in the Glen Oroua region has been suspended due to the prevailing weather. Approximately 1,000 m of stopbank has been raised to height, with the remaining 200 m scheduled to be undertaken when conditions allow; likely in November. The works undertaken in raising the stopbank were executed on the land side of the stopbank allowing reassurance that the integrity of the stopbank has not been significantly compromised as a result of the works. When work resumes at the site the remaining 200 m of stopbank will be raised, the borrow areas will be filled with material taken from the river channel, all fences will be reinstated, and exposed earth soil will be grassed. As a result of observations by the landowner, staff will also investigate a possible seepage path under this part of the network. 8.26. Willow mulching has continued to occur on the Oroua River. The mulching undertaken mirrored the works completed on the true right bank in May to ensure that the flow of the Oroua is concentrated within the river channel, whilst keeping the river banks adequately protected. Work was undertaken from 14 km to 20.5 km on the left bank. Remaining wooden debris piles left on the berm following collection from the river channel from the June 2015 flood have also been burnt.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 24
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
8.27. Staff have been working with adjoining landowners to explore disposal options for some of the silt accumulating on the berms of the Oroua River. LiDAR photography has been done of the paddocks adjoining the river, with the intention of approaching landowners with low spots to determine whether they are amenable to having these low areas filled. Initial
feedback from landowners has seen two main issues raised; the transportation of the 6 Item noxious weed field horsetail from the river channel to farmland, and the potential decrease in fertility of land as a result of the silt spreading. 8.28. Scheme engineers are also assisting the Rural Upgrade Project on the Oroua River stopbanks. As part of the Rural Upgrade project, significant work is proposed downstream of Rangiotu Bridge. The stopbank requires raising however, the footprint is constrained by an existing workshop. The stopbank is also on the edge of the river, with no berm, so a rock lining will be required to protect the bank with a very costly concrete retaining wall on the landside of the bank. Given the condition of the workshop that is adjacent to the stopbank, it may be more cost effective to buy the workshop, and move the stopbank away from the river.
MANGAONE STREAM
8.29. Due to the time of year, very little general maintenance has been completed along the stream reserve. There have been several enquiries from, and visits to, properties with requests for trees to be removed. These will be removed later in the year when possible. 8.30. Mowing of the Mangaone Stream city reaches has not been completed this reporting period due to the wet ground conditions. The next mow will be completed as soon as ground conditions allow. 8.31. The old dog pound site on Botanical Road, where vegetation was removed last reporting period, has been identified as a possible stock pile area for works to be undertaken by PNCC in the coming months. PNCC have resource consent to construct walkway/ cycleway underpasses at bridges through out the city, which currently lapses in October. Botanical Road and Highbury Avenue are the next locations on the list. PNCC have approached River Management staff to assist in obtaining a variation to their resource consent, due to some redesign issues and time pressures from the NZTA. Horizons will not approve any significant works to be undertaken in the Mangaone before October. 8.32. Scheme staff are continuing to liaise with PNCC regarding repair requirements around city assets on the Mangaone Stream. Where the walkway is planned for construction under bridges, and repairs are less urgent, protection works will be combined with the walkway construction, such as the aforementioned underpass for Botanical Road. 8.33. The Mangaone Stream city reach is frequently inspected by scheme engineers and, overall, is in a good condition with regards to flood protection. Any areas where risk to stopbanks becomes imminent, emergency works will be completed. Non-urgent works to be completed this year include the replacement of the timber floodwall with rock riprap below Rangitikei Line, and assisting PNCC with the replacement or repair of their gabion baskets downstream of Tremaine Avenue Bridge. 8.34. Staff continue to manage enquiries and requests from the public and neighbouring residents regarding the Mangaone Reserve. This reporting period has included topics such as storm water runoff from the stopbanks and across properties, the formation of ‘sinkholes’ on neighbouring properties (thought to be due to storm water systems), vegetation trimming and tree removal requests. Trees which are causing damage to property or pose a risk to stopbank integrity are considered a higher priority for removal than those posing only a minor nuisance.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 25
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
8.35. As a result of the current popularity of augmented reality games such as ‘Pokémon Go’, there has been anecdotal evidence suggesting an increase in private vehicular movements along the Mangaone Stream stopbanks. The stopbanks are being monitored and any damage repaired as necessary. This issue has brought forward the need for barriers to be
Item 6 Item installed at access points within the city where currently vehicular access is very easy.
MAKINO STREAM
8.36. Several areas of the Makino Stream had maintenance works undertaken, consisting of channel clearing of flood debris, and/or fallen trees, namely Rata Street, Reids Line and Boness Road.
DERBY CREEK
8.37. No works have been undertaken on Derby Creek this reporting period.
STONEY CREEK
8.38. No works have been undertaken on Stoney Creek in this reporting period.
MANGAORE STREAM
8.39. Annual inspection of the scheme and all floodgates have been completed.
MOUTOA FLOODWAY
8.40. The annual inspection of all floodways, stopbanks and floodgates has been completed. Maintenance tasks have also been completed, including spraying of lime on the tops of the piers and removal of silt and debris from the apron.
TOKOMARU RIVER 8.41. Annual inspections of all assets including floodgates, have been completed. 8.42. During flood events, significant piping is evident along several parts of the Tokomaru River stopbanks. Much of this is attributed to the presence of large logs buried in the substrate layers below the stopbanks themselves. However, with the Rural Upgrade Project beginning in this area, information regarding the strength and stability of existing stopbanks is vital to the design and to ensuring the integrity of upgraded lengths. 8.43. In addition to the Foxton Loop site, Damwatch have also provided geotechnical advice on this issue. As a result, four test pits were dug along a 500 m length of berm on the upstream side of the Okuku Road Bridge known to have piping issues. Each of these sites provided evidence of piping through old vegetation at varying scales, within a similar substrate layer. Soil samples were also taken, to assist in stopbank composition and integrity investigations. In the coming weeks further investigations will take place.
LOWER KIWITEA STREAM SCHEME
8.44. One erosion site, resulting from last June’s flood, was repaired using a combination of tied tree works and permeable groynes.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 26
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
KAHUTERAWA STREAM SCHEME
8.45. No works have been undertaken on the Kahuterawa Stream Scheme this reporting period.
ASHHURST STREAM SCHEME 6 Item
8.46. As agreed at the last Annual Catchment Community Meeting, a programme of works was put together to replace the stock gates on the stream where recent flood protection works were completed. A further six stock gates have been constructed and installed this reporting period. This brings the total completed to 12. 8.47. An erosion site downstream of North Street was repaired using large concrete blocks. 8.48. The stream channel, downstream of Custom Street, was cleared of overhanging vegetation. 8.49. The following table schedules all current Rural Upgrade Project works and provides commentary on present project status. Project Title Description Status Manawatu River Right Bank Upgrade 4,700 m of stopbank on Survey is complete and design Stopbank Upgrade, Te Matai the right bank of the Manawatu work is in progress. Land entry Rd River adjoining Te Matai Rd, agreements have been sent to Whakarongo. affected landowners and negotiations are proceeding. Manawatu River Right Bank Upgrade 1,600 m of stopbank on Survey is complete and design Stopbank Upgrade, the right bank of the Manawatu work is in progress. Land entry Longburn Railway River along the railway line and agreements are currently being adjoining farmland east of prepared for affected landowners. Longburn. Meetings will then take place. Manawatu River Right Bank Upgrade 930 m of the Manawatu This work is carried forward from Stopbank Upgrade, DOC River right bank stopbank on 2015-16. A contract has been Reserve, Springs Rd, Department of Conservation awarded to Paranui Contractors Whirokino reserve land at two locations in the Ltd. The contractor will re-establish vicinity of Whirokino Rd and on site when ground conditions Springs Rd, Whirokino. permit. Manawatu River Left Bank Upgrade 200 m of the Manawatu Survey and design work will be Stopbank Upgrade, River left bank stopbank at undertaken along with Land entry Koputaroa Koputaroa. agreements in October. Manawatu River Right Bank Construct 35 m of concrete Survey and design work is Concrete Floodwall, Ervine floodwall on the Manawatu River complete. A contract has been Property, Rangiotu right bank at the Ervine property, awarded to ABC Contractors. Rangiotu. Work will commence on site when ground conditions permit. Oroua River Left Bank Upgrade 2,000 m of existing Survey is complete and design is Stopbank Upgrade, stopbank and construct 500 m of due to commence in August. Downstream of Awahuri new stopbank on the left bank of Horizons staff have contacted all Bridge the Oroua River immediately affected landowners and met on downstream of the SH3 Bridge at site with most. Land entry Awahuri. agreement documentation will remain on hold until design is complete and the full extent of works is better understood.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 27
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Oroua River Right Bank Upgrade 1,300 m of existing Survey is complete and design is Stopbank Upgrade, stopbank and construct 800m of due to commence in August. Downstream of Awahuri new stopbank on the right bank of Horizons staff have contacted all Bridge the Oroua River immediately affected landowners and met on
Item 6 Item downstream of the SH3 Bridge at site with most. Land entry Awahuri. agreement documentation will remain on hold until design is complete and the full extent of works is better understood. Oroua River Left Bank Construct between 1,000 and The Catchment Information Team Stopbank Upgrade, 2,000 m of new stopbank on the are currently reconciling 2005 Upstream of Awahuri Bridge left bank of the Oroua River Lidar information to an established immediately upstream of the SH3 datum enabling an accurate Bridge at Awahuri. alignment to be determined. Survey work is programmed to follow this process. Oroua River Right Bank Construct 500 m of new stopbank The Catchment Information Team Stopbank Upgrade, on the right bank of the Oroua are currently reconciling 2005 Upstream of Awahuri Bridge River and Makino Stream Lidar information to an established upstream of the SH3 bridge at datum enabling an accurate Awahuri. alignment to be determined. Survey work is programmed to follow this process. Oroua River Left and Right Upgrade 3,000 m of existing Survey and design work are Bank Stopbank Upgrade, stopbank on the left and right currently in process along with Rangiotu banks of the Oroua River at negotiations with landowners and Rangiotu downstream of the leases over land entry Highway 56 Bridge to the considerations. Manawatu River confluence. Oroua River Right Bank Investigate the construction of a Engineering drawings have been Concrete Floodwall, Turks 2.6 m high concrete floodwall on completed but other options are Poultry, Rangiotu the Oroua River right bank currently being investigated due to stopbank adjoining the Turks a number of risk factors at this Poultry workshop. location. Linton Main Drain Left and Upgrade 1,000 m of existing An external surveyor familiar with Right Bank Stopbank stopbank on both banks of the HDC roading specifications has Upgrade, Tane Rd Linton Main Drain downstream of been engaged to carryout survey Tane Road. The right bank work commencing in August. involves undertaking road re- Meetings with landowners are construction work on the crest of currently in progress. the upgraded stopbank. Tokomaru River Left and Upgrade 4,300 m of existing Investigations into existing Right Bank Stopbank stopbank on both banks of the stopbank and foundation integrity Upgrade, Okuku Rd Tokomaru River from Okuku are currently in progress. Pumpstation upstream to Opiki Tendering for external survey Road. resourcing is also being considered. Meetings with affected landowners are in progress. Design is programmed for early September. Land entry agreement documentation will remain on hold until design is complete and the full extent of works is better understood.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 28
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Mangaore Stream Left and Upgrade 2,700 m of existing Survey is complete and design Right Bank Stopbank stopbank on both banks of the work is programmed for early Upgrade, Shannon Mangaore Stream downstream of August. Meetings with landowners Otauru Road, Shannon. and negotiations over land entry
considerations are currently in 6 Item progress. Land entry agreement documentation will remain on hold until design is complete and the full extent of works is better understood. Protect Individual Property, Lift the Mason house at 943 Negotiations are currently in J.Mason, Lockwood Rd Lockwood Rd by 300 mm to a progress with the landowner. A height of RL 10.19 m. design professional has been engaged to resolve a number of construction issues around raising this house. Protect Individual Property, Provide flood protection to the Negotiations with the property Taonui Farms, Main Drain Taonui Farms dairy shed to a owners will commence in August Rd height of RL 10.19 m. 2016. Protect Individual Property, Provide flood protection to the Negotiations with the property Rangiotu Estates, Highway Rangiotu Estates dairy shed to a owners will commence in August 56 height of RL 10.19 m. 2016.
9. NORTHERN AREA
GENERAL
9.1. The long, dry, stable weather conditions experienced through autumn came to an abrupt end in June when winter rain saturated the soils and access to work sites became impossible. Up until this time the Northern area had completed an impressive volume of work and staff are happy with their accomplishments for the year. With the change in seasons we are now focused on asset inspections, end-of-year reporting and planning for the 2016-2017 year.
TRAINING AND FORUMS
9.2. Staff have been involved in several training opportunities this period including: AMS and Asset Inspections – refresher on using iPad inspection forms and processes.
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
9.3. No community involvement meetings were attended during the reporting period.
RANGITIKEI RIVER CONTROL SCHEME
RANGITIKEI MAINTENANCE WORKS
9.4. Construction work has come to a stop as wet weather is now limiting access availability to work sites. There is about $70,000 of planned flood repairs to complete and work on these will begin again in the spring when ground conditions allow. At this time of year the emphasis changes and we are now focusing on collecting willow poles for the August/ September planting season.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 29
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
9.5. A number of the rope and rail groynes installed over summer are being tested already with the higher winter river levels. The new installations at Mary Wilson’s property have been wet twice now and early indications show they are effectively lowering flow velocities
against the erodible river bank. Item 6 Item 9.6. We are very pleased with results from this year’s aerial spraying programme. Each year the build up of vegetation on river beaches and berms are sprayed to discourage permanent growth and enable the movement of gravel downstream. Loose gravel movement in the river reaches allows a natural meander pattern to occur without the formation of high gravel beds that divert flows into private property. 9.7. The NZTA project to upgrade the rock lining on the right bank upstream of the Bulls Bridge is progressing well. Work is now approximately 75% completed and the contractor must be applauded for the well managed work site. River Management staff continue to assist the contractor with river issues and providing communication links to the Bulls River Group. 9.8. The presence of the Giant Willow Aphid is now being noticed by the public as trees loose their leaves and the black honeydew stain on the stem is highlighted. There are concerns that many willows will not survive the winter and how loss in numbers will affect our river erosion protection capability. 9.9. On 8 June a Tangimoana floodgate exercise was held on site. A full installation of the gates was undertaken complete with road closure and public notification. These exercises are carried out yearly to ensure staff remain familiar with actions they need to take in an emergency and to identify improvements to the systems. 9.10. Staff attended a meeting with Reu Reu Road landowners and engineers from MDC to discuss management issues around the Waituna Stream Road Bridge. Gravel aggradation around the bridge piles, compounded with high debris loads during flood events, is encouraging the stream to deviate around the bridge. Horizons input is to work with landowners advising on stream bank vegetation clearance needs and have the Compliance Team investigate allegations of poor land management practices upstream during logging operations that now result in excessive debris during high flows.
RANGITIKEI CAPEX WORKS
PAREWANUI STOPBANK UPGRADE FOR 2016-17
9.11. Survey, design and drawings have been completed in preparation for upgrading a further 1 km of the Parewanui stopbank from river distance 5 km to 6 km. With major flood damage occurring as a result of the 20 June 2015 flood last year and the subsequent flood damage repairs to the stopbank toe, there was no stopbank upgrade work completed last construction season. A claim was submitted to MCDEM for this flood damage repair work and it is expected that the scheme will be reimbursed 60% of the total repair cost, $275,182. It is intended to add the estimated MCDEM payment of $165,110 to this year’s capex budget of $205,045, allowing approximately 1.35 km of stopbank upgrade work to be completed this coming construction season. This will go someway to catching up with the programmed work that had to be postponed from last year. Preparation for the contract documentation will be commencing very shortly, with the plan to commence construction work in November 2016.
PAREWANUI FLOOD PROTECTION UPGRADE PROGRAMME
9.12. Following the 2004 flood event, the Rangitikei River suffered severely from extensive flood damage and also serious flooding particularly in the Parewanui, Tangimoana and Scotts Ferry areas. In 2006, it was determined that the Parewanui stopbanks needed upgrading
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 30
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
with a 15 year upgrade programme being approved; the current financial year constitutes Year 12 of that programme. It is intended to table a report at the November committee meeting providing a summary of how that project is tracking.
RANGITIKEI RIVER ENHANCEMENT 6 Item
9.13. No enhancement work was undertaken this period.
GRAVEL EXTRACTION
9.14. No gravel extraction has taken place from Council’s consents in the reporting period.
POHANGINA-OROUA RIVER CONTROL SCHEME
POHANGINA RIVER
9.15. Future planning work is underway with the selection of suitable sites for pole planting. 9.16. Prices are expected soon for the proposed construction of a field willow nursery at the Bolton property near the Saddle Road Bridge. There is a shortage of good willow for pole harvesting in this area and the addition of a well laid out field nursery will reduce costs for the scheme. A large part of the costs for this work will be the installation of secure fencing and security as the area has a history of fly tipping and environmental damage due largely to its seclusion.
GRAVEL EXTRACTION
9.17. No gravel extraction has occurred during this period.
RAUMAI BRIDGE EROSION PROTECTION
9.18. For several years now concern has been expressed about the deterioration of the channel alignment in the Pohangina River immediately upstream of the Raumai Bridge. Prior to the June 2015 flood event, it was the engineers’ view that the dramatic and undesirable channel alignment at the site, resulting in a serious bank erosion on the right bank of the Pohangina River, could encroach and potentially sever the road access to the Raumai Bridge in one major flood event. 9.19. Designs were prepared and discussions were held with the MDC as to the impact of a flood event that could detrimentally affect their assets. Consequently, financial approval has now been given by MDC for HRC staff to manage the proposed contract. Staff have completed tender documentation, and currently tenders are being called. Tenders close on 4 August with a 12 week contract period to construct a major rock groyne and associated rope and rail groynes to mitigate future flood erosion to the right bank of the Pohangina River. The lengthy contract period is allowing for the difficulties in supply of rock that is currently being experienced.
TOTARA RESERVE
9.20. No work has been undertaken in this reporting period.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 31
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
OROUA RIVER
9.21. The only construction work completed this reporting period was some Layered Tree Bank Protection Work (LTBPW) at the Griffith’s property in Almadale Road. The owners have
Item 6 Item expressed their appreciation of the work Horizons has organised at this site.
GRAVEL EXTRACTION
9.22. A total of 6005 m3 of gravel has been extracted from the Oroua River this reporting period.
UPPER WHANGANUI RIVER MANAGEMENT SCHEME
9.23. During this period the final few programmed maintenance and repair works were completed including; a small rock repair at Victory Bridge; the repairing of fences and the tidying and sowing of grass seed on the Turaki Street stopbank development project. Some stopbank mowing was also carried out. Finally, 150 tonnes of rock riprap was supplied and stockpiled in the Poole’s rock area in preparation for repair works next year.
TARINGAMOTU RIVER MANAGEMENT SCHEME
9.24. No work was undertaken this reporting period.
MATARAWA FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME
9.25. Rock is now delivered and stored on site at the Gudsell property. This will be used for the construction of a rock lining upstream of the diversion structure where erosion is threatening a section of stopbank. Work is expected to begin in August following the landowner approving the proposed work programme.
TUTAENUI FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME
9.26. The two significant studies currently in progress for the Tutaenui Scheme are progressing well, the first being a scheme audit that will review performance objectives against those delivered and also identify any optimisations that could provide a greater continuity of flood protection to the community. The second is an exercise looking at flood plain modelling, with a particular interest in flood mitigation options for Marton and Bulls. 9.27. Several property owners in the lower reaches of the river below Curls Bridge have conveyed their concerns about gravel build up since the June 2015 flood. In some areas this build up has had a detrimental effect on channel shape and flow carrying capacities resulting in more frequent flow over the berms. Staff will look at the feasibility of obtaining a global gravel extraction consent for the scheme to enable some better management of this problem. 9.28. Marton staff, with assistance from Council’s Compliance Team, are assisting a landowner in the upper catchment just below the Marton water supply dam deal with a problem of excess concrete rubble dumped in his paddock adjacent to, and in, the stream bed. Contractors working in Marton have used the site to rid themselves of concrete waste and deposited volumes far greater than approved by the owner. Unfortunately with the onset of winter conditions and the resulting wet paddocks it may be spring before this problem is resolved.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 32
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
MAKIRIKIRI FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME
9.29. The intentionally breached section of stopbank on Richard Redmayne’s property was repaired in early June and will now provide winter flood protection. These repairs were
delayed at the request of Mr Redmayne until after the harvest of his maize crop. 6 Item 9.30. Also completed was the annual inspection and maintenance of floodgates including the removal of silt where required.
MAKIRIKIRI EGRESS GATE
9.31. Resulting from significant flood events in the Turakina River in October 2013, and again in June 2015, the need to construct a flood egress gate through the Makirikiri Scheme stopbank become a high priority. The flooding on both these occasions and particularly the latter event, closed the Turakina Beach Road for several days isolating the Koitiata community. During these large flood events floodwater from the Turakina River overflowed the surrounding farmland, eventually ponding against the outside of the Makirikiri Stream stopbanks. With no natural drainage options the rising flood level resulted in closing the Turakina Beach Road. To mitigate extended road closures the Makirikiri Stream stopbank was mechanically breached to quickly lower the flood levels ensuring the Koitiata community was not isolated and subjected to an unacceptable risk to their wellbeing. 9.32. The installation of the flood egress structure was seen as a good solution by allowing drainage to occur immediately. This will reduce road closure times to hours rather than days. At the same time the scheme’s flood protection capability is not compromised. 9.33. The revised funding requirements for this project are estimated at $125,000 with the largest share of nearly 60% being funded by the NZTA through the Rangitikei District Council (RDC). Horizons Regional Council will then fund a further 30% of the cost by way of environmental grant with the remaining balance being met by the landowner. The high level of financial support from NZTA reflects the importance of providing a largely retired and aged community with access to community services outside of their township. 9.34. Tenders were called in March 2016 with 15 sets of documents uplifted, but only two tenders were received at the closing date. The contract has now been let to ABC Contractors Ltd for a sum of $124,550 with an agreed start date for construction of 9 January 2017. By providing a lead-in time and constructing the egress structure during the summer months, considerable savings have been made. The contract period is six weeks. 9.35. Once constructed the flood egress gate will become a Makirikiri Scheme asset with inspections and maintenance undertaken by Horizons’ staff. 9.36. It must be noted, that a high level of collaboration was achieved between both councils and the property owner throughout initial project discussions. The outcome being a design that will greatly benefit the local community.
POREWA FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME
9.37. Large trees close to the stream in Hunterville continue to cause problems as they topple over into the waterway blocking flows. Access through private property to clear these obstructions is not easy with many landowners unwilling to allow the temporary removal of fences to allow the commencement of work. Both the time spent finding alternate access options and the extra distance then required to cart the debris from the waterway has increased costs to the scheme.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 33
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
9.38. Work replacing the temporary Bailey Bridge at Te Hou Hou Road by the RDC is progressing well. River Management staff continue to maintain a close dialogue with the contractor to ensure work does not conflict with scheme activities.
Item 6 Item WHANGAEHU MANGAWHERO RIVER MANAGEMENT SCHEME
9.39. Following this year’s recently completed channel clearing work programme, there remained some minor fencing repairs at the Riverlea Farm to be completed. This has now been completed.
TURAKINA RIVER MANAGEMENT SCHEME
9.40. Due to very wet weather and ground conditions some work programmed to be completed in June had to be postponed. This work was completed during July where three sites at Greene, Glasgow and Stewart’s properties were cleared of trees and debris blocking the river channel. In addition, approximately 300 m of channel and flood debris were cleared from the channel and banks at Greene’s property.
LOWER WHANGANUI VEGETATION MANAGEMENT AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAMME
9.41. During June the monthly maintenance programmed works were completed at Upokongaro Jetty, Kowhai Park and Balgownie, this included culvert inspections and maintenance repairs, releasing of native plants and weed spraying in the Gilberd Street area of Balgownie and spraying of a length of bamboo infestation in the rowing club area.
PAKIHI SCHEME
9.42. No work was undertaken this reporting period.
FOREST ROAD DRAINAGE SCHEME
9.43. Following the spraying programme there was 2.2 km of mechanical drain cleaning undertaken this reporting period.
HAUNUI DRAINAGE SCHEME
9.44. The scheme drain spraying programme is now complete.
OTHER WORKS
NORTHERN ANNUAL SCHEME REPORT
9.45. Each year an Annual Report is prepared outlining the activities, and financial standing of the 14 schemes in the Northern area for the previous financial year. It is great to report that this document is now completed.
THE BIG FIVE
9.46. Currently one staff member is representing the Marton Service Centre on the Big 5 Strategy Group.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 34
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
ENGINEERING ADVICE
9.47. During the last two months there have been continued requests for advice on a variety of issues including rural flooding in non-scheme areas, involving clearing blocked culverts,
clearing stream channels of vegetation and fallen trees, drainage issues and flood damage 6 Item work. 9.48. One specific request on the Taringamotu has involved a major slip threatening property with staff involved in providing advice, assisting with resource consent applications, including working with Fish and Game New Zealand in the Waikato and securing approval for works to proceed with favourable outcomes for all parties involved. As soon as the resource consent has been granted the property owner will be able to proceed with this urgent repair work.
ENVIRONMENTAL GRANT WORK
9.49. As a result of the June and the September 2015 flood events there has been an increased level of requests for flood damage repair works. This year there have been 22 environmental grant applications made with repairs at 15 sites now completed, with a further four sites approved but have been postponed to next year, and three others that have been delayed by the property owners.
OTHER PROJECTS
MOAWHANGO RIVER
9.50. After a period of wet ground conditions all the slash heaps of trees and debris cleared from this year’s work site at the Duncan property was able to be burned. Genesis Energy have now been invoiced 100% for this year’s programmed work including staff time for the management of this project.
KOITIATA BUNDING
9.51. A joint project with RDC to provide a flood protection bund at the entrance to Koitiata Village has now been constructed and the carriageway was sealed in June. Historically a stream has overflowed its channel at the road bridge just before entering Koitiata. Floodwater has then been conveyed into the village along the roadway causing damage to properties on the eastern side of the community.
MISCELLANEOUS
9.52. From time to time properties with detention dams change ownership. Recently a new Licence Agreement was signed up with a new landowner on one of the Porewa Scheme detention dam sites. The Licence Agreement fee paid by Horizons acknowledges that the Council has rights under statute to enter the owner’s land at reasonable times with vehicles and other machinery or equipment in order to examine, clean, repair or otherwise maintain the existing dam and if necessary to reconstruct the dam and the works on the owner’s land. 9.53. The parties acknowledge that the owner’s land has been injuriously affected by the dam and the works, and have calculated the owner’s entitlement to full compensation for such injurious affection, and have fixed the licence fee in recognition of full compensation.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 35
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
10. EASTERN AREA
GENERAL
Item 6 Item 10.1. So far winter has been fairly mild, and while there have been several large downpours the Eastern rivers and streams have not flooded to any notable degree. 10.2. The highest total rainfall recorded in the Eastern catchment over the last two months was close to 400 mm which was recorded at the Upper Mangahao hydro recording site in the Tararua Ranges, much less than the typical 600 mm which fell during the same period last year. 10.3. During the last two months staff have been busy finishing off any remaining programmed works while also undertaking all the normal end-of-year tasks. Tasks including compiling asset inspections, updating the AMS with works completed and inspection records and collating claim summaries ready for the second claim to the MCDEM. 10.4. Staff have also been busy considering the feasibility of combining existing channel clearance activity into one larger district-wide scheme. The idea is that this will cover the entire Tararua area and afford staff the flexibility to manage channel congestion in a number of rivers and streams that are currently in need of attention and avoid establishing numerous small targeted rate schemes. 10.5. KiwiRail’s project to repair the Ngawapurua Rail Bridge has gained some momentum over the last two months. Divers surveyed the pads of the bridge in June and KiwiRail committed to underpinning a further six piers soon after. As part of this work KiwiRail will also investigate some potential substantial channel realignment works upstream of the bridge. The purpose of this is to align the Tiraumea River so that it flows more directly under the bridge rather than along the piers, relieving the bridge of unnecessary stresses. 10.6. Because the construction season has now come to an end only a small amount of gravel has been extracted over the last two months. A total of 2,100 m³ was extracted from the Tamaki River for use in roading and concrete projects. 10.7. A recent inspection of the Eastern area’s willow plantings have shown that the Giant Willow Aphid has started to disappear for winter, but that it has also caused a noticeable level of damage in some plantings. For this reason staff are interested to see how the population recovers after winter and are interested to see what the true effect has been on the plantings once they start to sprout in spring. In the meantime, staff continue to stay in contact with the Willow and Poplar Collective to learn more about the problem. In the short-term however, the intention is to manage risk by planting bigger poles this coming season, as bigger willow poles appear to handle the stress of the Giant Willow Aphid much better than the smaller ones.
AKITIO SCHEME
10.8. Generally the Akitio catchment has remained fairly dry throughout the last two months and while a reasonable rainfall event at the end of June was not enough to cause any flooding, it was welcomed by the landowners. 10.9. As stated in the last bi-monthly, this has been a season of reduced works for the Akitio and as such, there were no works completed this reporting period. This means that the only work to be completed this season was the Old Mans Beard (OMB) poisoning which was carried out in March. While the work appears to have been successful, staff are aware that there will still be an abundant amount of seed still in the soil that will require ongoing maintenance.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 36
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
10.10. Current inspections indicate that the scheme is in a good position going into winter. However going forward, staff will continue to monitor the river for willow debris while also monitoring the debris accumulation at the river mouth. This is to be done in accordance with the agreement made earlier in the season with local landowners. To date, inspections
of the beach show that this material continues to do a good job of protecting the vulnerable 6 Item foreshore from wave action.
EASTERN MANAWATU SCHEME
10.11. Like the Akitio, the Manawatu has been relatively settled over the last two months, the only exception has been a fresh which occurred in early July aiding the river to rise to 4 m at the Weber Road (Dannevirke) recording site. While 4 m is a reasonable fresh, staff have been pleased to find that there were no problems that occurred as a result of it. In fact, this could actually be seen as a good sign because given that this is the highest the river has been since September and no debris were mobilised, it possibly indicates that a lot of the abundant decaying willow has either now rotted or passed through the system indicating that we are over the initial hump of debris release. 10.12. Over the last two months staff have finished off programmed works, prepared for planting and undertaken a thorough inspection of the entire channel. The works included some ringbarking undertaken in two locations on the outsides of bends, and was done to remove the mass of trees while keeping the roots intact. 10.13. The scheme is in a good position going into winter, but staff will continue to undertake inspections for debris dams or any issues that might arise as river levels continue to fluctuate over the winter period.
IHURAUA SCHEME
10.14. Ongoing inspections show that the Ihuraua Stream channel is still clear and free flowing. Previous years’ efforts to clear the constrictions that were identified in the 2011 scheme audit have clearly been of benefit. As such, this stream is in a good position going into winter and staff will continue to monitor its condition over the coming months.
MANGATAINOKA SCHEME
10.15. Over the last two months staff have focused on completing any remaining programmed works, while also beginning preparations for the coming season’s planting works. The works completed were Tree Bank Protection Work (TBPW), two sites of rope & rail groynes and the cleaning of a short section of scheme drain. 10.16. As mentioned in the past, this season’s programmed works included $389,000 worth of extra flood damage repairs and funding requiring the reprioritisation of $159,000 worth of budgeted funds, as well as the addition of $230,000 worth of emergency reserve funds. However, while this will still be the case to some degree in the short-term, the subsequent claim to MCDEM will likely make close to $155,000 being available in the coming season to help reduce the overall impact. 10.17. No gravel was extracted from the Mangatainoka River this reporting period. 10.18. Staff have also been investigating and planning a programme of works to help alleviate the ongoing flooding problems caused by the Mangaramarama Stream, north of Pahiatua. Proposed works include the realignment of one meander, the excavation of two overflow channels and a short stopbank to redirect the worst of the flood waters around several properties. A small amount of survey has been completed and the Design and Investigations Team have produced figures indicating a positive effect on channel capacity
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 37
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
if these proposals are implemented. A staged approach to the works has been adopted to make the works affordable. It is anticipated work on the upstream overflow and channel realignment will be undertaken in the coming financial year once consent has been
granted. Item 6 Item SOUTH EASTERN RUAHINE SCHEME
10.19. Although river levels had started to fluctuate over the last couple of months all programmed works were able to be completed and pleasingly this has put the scheme in a good position going into winter. This has been quite a feat given that the season’s works budget was almost three times the original as a result of the June 2015 flood. 10.20. Further to this, it has also been pleasing to have completed all of the flood damaged works which are to be claimed for (through MCDEM). This means the scheme can now put the claim process behind it and focus on a more normal works programme next season. 10.21. As mentioned in the past, this scheme’s original works programme included $421,911 worth of flood damage repairs and funding requiring the reprioritisation of the existing works budget, as well as the addition of $357,500 worth of emergency reserve funds. However, while this will still be the case to some degree in the short-term, the subsequent claim to MCDEM will likely make close to $78,000 available in the coming season to help recuperate some of the flood damage costs. 10.22. During the last two months 2,100 m³ of gravel was extracted from two sites on the Tamaki for use in concrete and roading projects. This was taken from a location identified by the Scheme Manager, as aggrading and needing gravel removal to help alleviate flooding and erosion problems. 10.23. Going forward, staff will be busy undertaking the planting programme while continuing to carryout inspections to help keep the coming seasons’ works programme up-to-date.
TAWATAIA - MANGAONE SCHEME
10.24. As with the Ihuraua, ongoing inspections indicate that the scheme is in a good position going into winter with all channels conveying flood waters very well as a result of this season’s efforts. 10.25. Going forward staff will continue to monitor channel performance over winter in preparation for next year’s works.
UPPER MANAWATU/LOWER MANGAHAO SCHEME
10.26. The works programme for the Upper Manawatu/Lower Mangahao Scheme was completed last period. This period staff have focused on finalising accounts for the end of the financial year, preparing summaries of works to be included in the second MCDEM claim, inspecting and recording asset conditions while also preparing the planting programme for the coming season. 10.27. Fourteen of the 20 flood damage works which are to be claimed for (through MCDEM) are now complete, meaning there are only six still remaining to be undertaken in the coming financial year. 10.28. As mentioned earlier, works this year have included $172,548 worth of flood damage repair funded through reprioritising existing works funds as well as the addition of $128,245 worth of emergency reserve funds. However, while this will still be the case to some degree in the short-term, the subsequent claims to MCDEM will likely make close to $80,000 available in the coming season to help minimise the overall impact on the scheme.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 38
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
10.29. No gravel was extracted from the Upper Manawatu or Mangahao Rivers this period. 10.30. Going forward, staff will be busy undertaking the planting programme while continuing to
carryout inspections to help keep the coming season’s works programme up-to-date. Item 6 Item ENVIRONMENTAL GRANT WORKS AND ENGINEERING ADVICE
10.31. There have been few new enquiries for environmental grant assistance this reporting period. The only work to be undertaken this period was a small length of bank protection taking place on the Mangaroa. This piece of work was the last of six pieces of grant work to be undertaken this season. While there were two other grants applied for, both have been cancelled as the landowners have since decided not to follow-up on the works.
11. SOUTHERN AREA
GENERAL
11.1. The weather over this period has been fairly unsettled which has kept staff busy ensuring that the drainage networks and pump stations are operating effectively. 11.2. Ongoing unsettled weather has seen large amounts of weed brought down to many of the scheme’s pump stations. Staff and contractors have been kept busy going around the scheme pump stations clearing the weed build up to ensure effective running of all pump stations. 11.3. The last of the scheme asset inspections have been completed and over the next month staff will be inputting the information they have obtained from these inspections into the AMS. 11.4. Staff attended a community meeting held by HDC updating residents from around Fairfield and Kimberley Roads on the progress being made around a solution to flooding issues in the northern part of Levin. HDC staff indicated at the meeting that they hope to complete all of their investigation work and consultation with the local landowners along the Koputaroa Stream by the end of August at which point, they will apply for resource consent from Horizons to increase the amount of stormwater discharge from Levin into the Koputaroa Stream. 11.5. A preliminary meeting has been held with staff from HDC to discuss the storm water and flooding issues around the Foxton township. A further meeting took place on Monday 25 July discussing issues with staff of HDC and members of the Foxton Community Board to try and identify the level of service that is expected from the Foxton community and to look into options to improve the current situation if the community desires to do so. 11.6. Staff have obtained design drawings and costs estimates from one of the local engineering firms who has been working with staff to mitigate the Health and Safety issues identified and reported previously that relate to the Cooks Pump Station. Efforts are being made to obtain additional estimates before awarding the work to a preferred supplier however, to date, these efforts have been unsuccessful.
OHAU-MANAKAU SCHEME
11.7. While the period has seen some consistent rainfall, the streams and rivers in the Ohau- Manakau Scheme have been reasonably quiet. The highest flows for this period occurred on 12 June with the Ohau peaking at 1.8 m (140m³/s). The highest flows in other channels are as follows: Waikawa with 1.4 m (58m³/s) and Manakau with 2 m (15m³/s).
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 39
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
11.8. The remainder of the period saw low flows with the next highest event being less than a third of the above. 11.9. Work during this period saw erosion protection undertaken on the Ohau at Hazlitt’s
property. A minor realignment of the channel due to gravel build up saw the need for Item 6 Item concrete riprap being placed to prevent further erosion. 11.10. A total of 1.5 km of drain machine cleaning occurred during the reporting period.
MANAWATU DRAINAGE SCHEME
11.11. Along a 100 m section of Whiskey Creek concrete was placed to repair a washout through Paul Argyle’s property. 11.12. Throughout this period large weed build up has formed at the Burkes Drain outlet, requiring machinery to remove the blockages. Failure to remove the blockages would impact on the drains gravity drainage and could prevent the floodgates closing in the event of a rise in the level of the Manawatu River. 11.13. Along a 600 m section of the Taonui Stream trees that had been restricting the flow in the channel were removed. 11.14. A 400 m section of Roberts Drain was machine cleaned through Argyle’s property. 11.15. A 1.1 km section of the old Mangaone Drain was machine cleaned and large trees that had been growing in the channel were removed. 11.16. In addition, a long reach digger was used to machine clean Tyacks Drain between the river and LMS stopbank.
MAKERUA DRAINAGE SCHEME
11.17. A warm autumn and early winter has seen continued weed growth in a number of scheme drains in particular those discharging to scheme pump stations. This has resulted in the need to mechanically clean a number of scheme drains to aid the flow of water. 11.18. A slump formed in Subway Drain restricting the flow of water; this has now been removed. 11.19. L10 floodgate along Linton Main Drain has been replaced after the gate was accidentally damaged during machine cleaning of the drain. 11.20. A long reach excavator was used to clear a section of Lagoon Drain from stopbank to river in order to release water. This was required so that a damaged floodgate could be inspected and repaired.
KOPUTAROA DRAINAGE SCHEME
11.21. A reported fault with the submersible at Koputaroa No. 4 Pump Station resulted in the pump being pulled so a visual inspection of the pump could be undertaken. The inspection revealed that weed had become trapped in the impeller preventing it from turning resulting in the pumping tripping out on overload. The weed was quickly removed and the pump reinstalled. 11.22. Koputaroa No.1 Pump Station required work on its door to ensure it would not jam. 11.23. As part of the scheme’s drain maintenance program, a number of scheme drains were mechanically cleaned.
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 40
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
MOUTOA - WHIROKINO DRAINAGE SCHEME
11.24. In order to improve access to the Whirokino Pump Station a new track has been constructed along the top of the stopbank. In previous years, the track to the pump station
could be dangerous during winter with the possibility of getting vehicles stuck or sliding off 6 Item the edge of the stopbank. To construct the track, metal was carted in, placed and compacted along the top of the stopbank and around the pump station. Large concrete blocks were also used to retain some of the bank around the pump station entranceway. 11.25. Work has been undertaken on the door into the Kerekere Road Pump Station to ensure it would not jam. 11.26. Temporary work has been carried out to repair the floodgate for the small Pleuger Pump Station after a number of the timber boards on the gate disappeared. New boards have been fitted to repair the gate however, since it is not the first time this has happened, a decision has been made to replace the entire gate with solid plastic. This replacement is programmed to be completed during the next reporting period. 11.27. As part of the scheme’s drain maintenance program, a number of scheme drains had been sprayed with herbicides to control the growth of submergent weed in a number of the main pump drains. A warmer than normal autumn has seen weed growth in many of these drains continue well into winter when normally it would be dying off. However, before the spray could take full effect a prolonged period of rain resulted in the need to put machinery into a number of drains and this has in turn impacted on the year end financial position.
TE KAWAU DRAINAGE SCHEME
11.28. A warm autumn and a poor result from some of the chemical spraying that had been done earlier in the period has seen a number of scheme drains requiring mechanical cleaning due to a high build up of weed, which was preventing water draining. 11.29. A floodgate outlet into the Johnson’s extension has been repaired. This was due to significant rusting of the hinges causing one side to hang in the water. 11.30. A new culvert and gateway was installed at Amon’s Drain in Craw’s property boundary, to make it easier for the spray truck to spray Amon’s Drain. A desire to install a boundary gate along scheme drains was expressed at the recent Catchment Community Meeting so hopefully this is the first of a number of gates to be installed over the coming periods. 11.31. A 1.9 km section of Longburn Drain had a large amount of weed build up requiring mechanical cleaning. Digger and trucks were required to clear the drain along Rongotea Road between Johnson’s Drain to Kopane School. 11.32. A 2.5 km section of Mill Drain was machine cleaned this reporting period.
HOKIO DRAINAGE SCHEME
11.33. A large willow tree was removed from the upstream side of the bridge leading to Hokio Beach. Branches from the tree had been leaning into the stream and catching debris which was floating down the stream.
12. ENVIRONMENTAL GRANT WORK
12.1. The status of grants approved during the 2015-16, together with those approved during the previous financial year but deferred, is as shown in the table below:
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 41
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Name River Type of Work Date Work Estimated/ Value of Approved Status Actual Grant
Works Cost Item 6 Item ($) N Tripe and Mangatipona Grade control 30/4/2015 Completed $26,292 $7,888 T Mathews Stream repairs
Blackfern Ongarue River Remove debris 12/8/2015 Completed $1,800 $540 Lodge blockages
M&N Porewa Erosion 21/9/2015 Completed $7,962 $2,388 Stewart Stream protection
C Waituna Erosion 21/9/2015 Completed $15,345 $4,604 Williamson Stream protection
S Dittmer Kiwitea Erosion 21/9/2015 Completed $5,195 $1,559 Stream protection
E Brook Kiwitea Erosion 21/9/2015 Completed $16,633 $4,990 Stream protection
C Nagel Tutaenui Erosion 21/9/2015 Completed $5,852 $1,756 Stream protection
D Porewa Erosion 30/10/2015 Completed $10,673 $3,202 Voelkerling Stream protection
Kym Black Oroua River at Erosion 30/10/2015 Carry over to $13,000 $3,900 Rangiwahia protection 2016-17 estimated estimated
W Blakely Porewa Erosion 16/12/15 Completed $32,078 $9,623 Stream protection
Fullerton- Tutaenui Erosion 2/12/15 Completed $16,575 $4,973 Smith Stream protection
Curwen Kiwitea Erosion 16/12/15 Completed $7,019 $2,109 Hare Stream protection
Redmayne Mangatikotoko Channel grade 5/2/2016 Completed $53,377 $16,013 Stream control Turakina C Hayes Tutaenui Erosion control 30/3/2016 Completed $11,536 $3,461 Stream
RDC Koitiata Flood protection 21/4/2016 Completed Grant contribution not required.
Alex & Sue Kiwitea Bank Flood 4/5/2016 Completed $1,689 $507 McKay Stream Damage Repairs N Randell Tutaenui Erosion Control 24/5/2016 Yet to $7,000 $2,100 Stream commence Estimated Estimated
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 42
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Tunnel Hill Makirikiri Flood water 29/7/2015 Yet to $124,550 $37,365 Stream egress structure & 2/6/2016 commence. estimated estimated
Bird and Kiwitea Erosion 31/7/2015 Completed $2,962 $890
Brown Stream protection Item 6 Item
J Heald Manawatu Erosion 4/9/2015 Completed $23,628 $7,102 River at Oringi protection
N Short Tapuata Erosion 21/9/2015 Completed $6,959 $2,088 Stream protection
K Norman Upper Erosion 17/7/2015 Completed $5,166 $1,550 Mangahao protection River G Bennett Upper Erosion 12/6/2015 Completed $19,701 $5,910 Mangahao protection River Pongaroa Pongaroa Erosion 4/2/2016 Completed $8,737 $2,463 Way –To-Go River protection/ Community channel control Group Jarrod Mangaroa Erosion control 1/3/2016 Completed $6,300 $1,890 Drysdale Valley estimated estimated
Hooper- Mangatoro Erosion 4/2/2016 Works now $8,000 $2,400 Smith and Stream protection on hold and estimated estimated Taylor to be completed next FY. Total Estimated Grant Commitment To Date $131,271
12.2. The Annual Plan budget for environmental grants (Rivers Fund) for the 15-16 financial year was $60,000. Having considered a paper to the Strategy and Policy Committee on 8 December 2015, Council approved an additional $50,000, giving a total budget of $110,000. 12.3. While that budget appears to be over committed (refer table above), a handful of projects, most notably the Makirikiri gate structure, will not commence until next financial year. The year end result will therefore be around $95,000.
13. SIGNIFICANCE
13.1. This is not a significant decision according to the Council’s Policy on Significance and Engagement.
Ramon Strong GROUP MANAGER RIVER MANAGEMENT
ANNEXES A Schedule of Completed Wokrs 1 June - 31 July 2016
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 43
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
SCHEDULE OF COMPLETED WORKS 1 June To 31 July 2016
Item 6 Item NORTHERN SCHEMES River Left Bank Distance (LB) Right Property Owner/Location Type of Work Quantity km Bank(RB) SCHEME NAME RANGITIKEI RIVER CONTROL SCHEME RIVER NAME RANGITIKEI JUNE 2.80 RB Parewanui No 2 Mechanical clean drain 4.5 km 3.25 RB Parewanui No 5 Mechanical clean drain 2.2 km 4.80 RB Parewanui No 3 Mechanical clean drain 4.5 km 7.80 RB Parewanui No 1 Mechanical clean drain 4.6 km 5.43 LB McKelvie Stockpile rock 205 tonne 9.05 RB Flock House Live tree bank protection work 105 m 9.06 RB Flock House Rope and rail groynes 32 m
19.30 LB Simpson Haul Road Stockpile rock 590 tonne 38.76 RB Lovelock Stockpile rock 154 t 44.10 RB Murphy Live tree bank protection work 160 m Stopbanks Weed spraying
Rangitikei River Noxious weed spraying AnnexA JULY 27.25 LB Sanson Metal Place rock on groynes 300 tonne Floodgates Repair walkway – Amon Drain Floodgates Minor repairs to floodgates X 4 Stopbanks Check all floodgates Willow poles Cut willow poles off the river
SCHEME NAME POHANGINA-OROUA SCHEME RIVER NAME POHANGINA RIVER JULY 13.0 RB Raumai Bridge Contract tender for rock groyne 2000 tonne
SCHEME NAME POHANGINA-OROUA SCHEME RIVER NAME OROUA JUNE 4.3 LB Colyton Road Gravel extraction 4005 m3 9.5 LB Spur Road Gravel extraction 2000 m3 13.8 RB Almadale Road Live tree bank protection work 200 m JULY 13.8 RB Almadale Road Pole planting 1050 poles
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 44
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
River Left Bank Distance (LB) Right Property Owner/Location Type of Work Quantity km Bank(RB) SCHEME NAME POREWA VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME JULY 6 Item Dam 54 Pinecone Ltd New Licence Agreement signed 1 ea Dams Check and clean dams SCHEME NAME MAKIRIKIRI FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME JUNE Tunnel Hill Egress Structure Contract let – Start 9 Jan 2017 Redmayne Reinstatement of stopbank 10 m LB – RB Redmayne-Major Checked floodgates, clear silting
SCHEME NAME MATARAWA FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME JUNE Dam 1.1 Sow grass seed in dam 2 ha JULY
Diversion channel Stockpile rock 100 tonne Diversion channel Remove logs from culvert X 2
SCHEME NAME TUTAENUI FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME
JUNE AnnexA Dams Check and clean dams
SCHEME NAME FOREST ROAD DRAINAGE SCHEME JUNE Drains Drain clean 2.2 km
SCHEME NAME HAUNUI DRAINAGE SCHEME JUNE Various Drain spraying 8.1 km
SCHEME NAME UPPER WHANGANUI RIVER MANAGEMENT SCHEME Upper Wanganui River JUNE 243.9 RB Cherry Grove/Victory Br Repair erosion hole – supply & 23 tonne install rock rip rap 244.8 RB Turaki Street Development Mow stopbank 500 m 244.8 RB Turaki Street Development Repair fencing 20 m 244.8 RB Turaki Street Development Supply and sow grass seed 5 ha 248.0 LB Poole’s Lining Supply & stockpile rock riprap 150 tonne
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 45
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
SCHEME NAME LOWER WHANGANUI RIVER MANAGEMENT SCHEME JUNE
Item 6 Item LB Upokongaro Jetty Monthly maintenance X 1 RB Rowing Club Spray bamboo 200 m LB Kowhai Park Clearing outlets to culverts 4 ea LB Kowhai Park Culvert inspections X 1 RB Balgownie Release natives and spray weeds 500 m RB Balgownie Culvert Inspections X 1
SCHEME NAME WHANGAEHU-MANGAWHERO RIVER SCHEME RIVER NAME WHANGAEHU JUNE 41.0 RB Riverlea Farm Repair fencing 100 m
SCHEME NAME TURAKINA RIVER CONTROL SCHEME JULY RB Greene Clear debris from channel & banks 300 m and burn slash heaps LB/RB Greene / Glasgow Remove trees from river channel at 40 m two sites and burn slash heaps RB Stewart Remove tree from channel & burn 20 m AnnexA debris slash heap
OTHER ACTIVITIES Non Scheme MOAWHANGO JUNE LB & RB Duncan property at Burning debris slash heaps 350 m Waikakahi Road
ENVIRONMENTAL GRANT WORKS Completed JUNE N Tripe Repair grade control structures on X 2 Mangatipona Stream Black Fern Lodge Remove willows from Ongarue 200 m River N Stewart Repair bank erosion and channel 50 m clearing on Porewa Stream C Williamson Install bank protection work on 100 m Waituna Stream S Dittmer Repair tree bank protection work 100 m and shape channel on Kiwitea Stream E Brook Install tree groynes 4 each Live tree bank protection work on 20 m Kiwitea Stream
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 46
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
C Nagel Repair concrete rip rap at two sites 40 m on Tutaenui Stream D Voelkering Repair rock lining on Porewa 100 tonne Stream R Fullerton-Smith Install rock lining on Tutaenui 230 tonne Stream 6 Item C Hare Repair live tree bank protection 50 m work at three sites on Kiwitea Stream W Blakely Live tree bank protection work at 160 m five sites on Porewa Stream Tunnel Hill Repair weir structures 4 each Repair culvert inlet 1 each Repair wall of tunnel hill flume 3 m Koitiata Install flood protection bund and 20 m repair existing bund A McKay Install rope and rail groyne on 8 m Kiwitea Stream C Hayes Install four rope and rail groynes on 50 m Tutaenui Stream
Approved Work Yet To Commence JULY N Randell Repair concrete mass block bank 20 m protection
AnnexA Clear channel on Tutaenui Stream 100 m
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 47
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
SOUTHERN SCHEMES River Left Bank Distance (LB) / Right Property Owner/Location Type of Work Quantity
(km) Bank (RB) Item 6 Item SCHEME NAME: OHAU-MANAKAU RIVER NAME: Ohau River 6.9 LB Hazlit property Placement of Riprap to fill in hole in 0.2km bank
RIVER NAME: Drainage Meads drain Machine clean 0.8km Lake Waitaha outlet Clean Tahamata cutting 0.7km
SCHEME NAME: MAKERUA DRAINAGE L10 Replace damaged floodgate Lagoon Drain Repair damaged floodgated outlet. 50m Drain Maintenance – Mechanical 3.44km
SCHEME NAME: MANAWATU DRAINAGE Whiskey Creek Concrete placed to repair washout 0.1km Burkes Pumpstation Modify exhaust on generator
Burkes Floodgate Remove large weed blocks AnnexA Taonui Stream Remove trees growing in the channel 0.6km Roberts Drain Machine cleaned 400m Old Mangaone Remove trees growing in the channel 1.1km and machine clean a section in Gibson’s property. Tyack’s Drain Long reach machine removed large 1.5km build up of weed.
SCHEME NAME: KOPUTAROA DRAINAGE Kop 4 pump station Clear weed caught in submersible pump Kop 1 pump station Repair to station door Drain Maintenance – Mechanical 8.49km
SCHEME NAME: MOUTOA - WHIROKINO DRAINAGE Whirokino Pump station Track to station refurbishment and laying of blocks Pleuger pump station Reconstruction of drainage pump floodgate Kerekere Rd Pumpstation Repair to station door Drain Maintenance – Mechanical 7.9km
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 48
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
SCHEME NAME: TE KAWAU DRAINAGE
Johnsons extension Repair floodgate hinges Rongotea Road Drain Machine Cleaned 1.9km
Drain Maintenance – Mechanical 12.5km 6 Item
SCHEME NAME: HOKIO DRAINAGE Hokio stream US bridge Removal of tree causing blockages 0.5km
AnnexA
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 49
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
EASTERN SCHEMES River Distance River Bank Property Owner / Type of Work Quantity (km) (LB/RB) Location
Item 6 Item MANGATAINOKA SCHEME RIVER / REACH: Mangatainoka River: Reach 6 49.5km Right Shannon/Death R&R Groynes 30m 49.3km Left Shannon TTW 20m RIVER / REACH: Drainage Hamua Channel Drain Reach Mechanical Clean 1000 Hamua Channel Drain Reach Lower/Replace Culvert 2ea
SOUTH EASTERN RUAHINES SCHEME RIVER / REACH: Kumeti Stream (M1) 8 km RB J. Stephenson repair rip rap 26 T 10 km LB Baxter gravel Extraction 100 m3 RIVER / REACH: Manga-Atua Stream (M2) 9.7 km LB Pinfold repair rock rip rap 100 T
9.6 km RB Harding remove trees 20 m 8.2 km LB Johnston repair rock rip rap 10 T 7.5 km LB Johnston Clear Channel 100 m 7.6 km LB Johnston Layer willow 100 m RIVER / REACH: Rokaiwhana Stream (M3) AnnexA 2.1 km LB & RB Trainor Rope & rail 10 m 1.1 km L & RB Christison Extract Gravel 500 m3 RIVER / REACH: Tamaki River (M4) 6.3 km RB Lowe/Boyden Extract Gravel 1500 m3 10.1 km RB Lamason Extract Gravel 100 m3 RIVER / REACH: Northern Streams (M5) Mangatera RB P. Borlase Channel clear/Plant 20 poles Mangatera L & RB TDC Domain Layer willow 150 m Tapuata L & RB B. Borlase/Thomson Channel clear 100 m RIVER / REACH: Drainage (DR) Glengarry No 2 L & RB Buchanan Clean drain 300m Glengarry No 2 L & RB Ross Clean Drain 100 m
UPPER MANAWATU / LOWER MANGAHAO SCHEME RIVER / REACH: Manawatu and Mangahao River: Reach 1 (U1) Manawatu River 114.5km Right Edwards Repair R&R 10m
EASTERN MANAWATU SCHEME RIVER / REACH: Manawatu River: Lower Reach (EL) 162.5 km LB Karena Ring bark willows 150 m 163 .5 km RB Lamason Ring bark willow/poplar 100 m
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 50
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
RIVER / REACH: Manawatu River: Upper Reach (EU) 143 - 188 km L & RB various Inspection flight 45 km
188 - 222 km L & RB various Inspection flight 34 km Item 6 Item ENVIRONMENTAL GRANTS RIVER / REACH: erosion protection 5 - 6 km L & RB Drysdale (Mangaroa ) works 250 m
AnnexA
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 51
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
CENTRAL SCHEMES
River Distance (km) River Bank Property Owner Type of Work Quantity
Item 6 Item (LB/RB) / Location
LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME MANAWATU RIVER 0-100km LB/RB Floodgate Inspection 177 Whirokino to Ashhurst 0-100km LB/RB Scheme River Inspection 100km 0-100km LB/RB LMS Asset Inspections 100km Drain machine 36km LB Coles cleaned 350 m 75km RB Tip Road Graffiti Removal 1 Removed Poplar 83km RB Van Echten Trees 2 Replace old access 1 gate, 83km RB Van Echten gate and repair fence 20m 83km RB Van Echten Placement of concrete 210 tonne
Site visit during Riprap 86km LB Hoults Workshop 1 Tied tree works – 100km RB Ashhurst Domain incomplete at time of report
LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME OROUA RIVER AnnexA 0-42km LB/RB Various Asset Inspections 84km 0-42km LB/RB Various Floodgate Inspections 9 0-42km LB/RB Various Stopbank Inspections 64km 15-20km LB/RB Various Willow Mulching 6km 33-35km RB Various Gravel Removal 7,500m3 LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME MAKINO 3.1km LB Boness Road – Clear fallen trees Wilson’s 7.5km LB Rata Street – Clear fallen trees Feilding 12.5km RB Reid’s Line – Clear fallen trees Bailey’s Makino Floodgates Structure Load test and electrical WOF LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME MANGAONE 0-10km RB/LB City Reaches Annual Asset 10km Inspections 10-17km RB/LB Various Annual Asset 7km Inspections
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 52
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME MOUTOA GATES
0km Piers Spray Lime on Piers 9 Apron Remove debris and silt
6 Item LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME MOUTOA FLOODWAY Stopbank Annual 0-10km Various Inspections 20km 0-10km Various Floodgate inspections x11 LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME MANGAORE STREAM Scheme inspection Various and check floodgates x 3 LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME KARA CREEK - MANGAPUKATEA Scheme inspection and checked Various floodgates 9 LOWER MANAWATU SCHEME TOKOMARU RIVER Test pits and soil sampling for piping 2.4-3km LB Woods investigation 4
ASHHURST STREAM SCHEME ASHHURST 3.06km LB/RB Wyndham Street Install new stock gate x1 – Bragg 3.10km LB/RB Wyndham Street Install new stock gate x1 – Bragg
3.5km LB/RB Custom Street Clear stream channel AnnexA of overhanging vegetation 3.52km LB/RB Custom Street – Install new stock gates x2 Walton 3.70km LB North Street – Erosion repair 8m Puklowski 3.82km LR/RB North Street – Install new stock gate x1 Puklowski 3.83km LB/RB North Street – Install new stock gate x1 Monteith LOWER KIWITEA STREAM SCHEME KIWITEA 3.7km RB Pharazyn Road – Tied tree works and 70m Haworth permeable groynes 8.5km LB Bell Road – Gravel extraction Williamson
River and Drainage Engineering Report (PRD 01 02) Page 53
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Report No. 16-153 Information Only - No Decision Required
SUMMARY ON THE AWARUA FLOOD MITIGATION INVESTIGATIONS REPORT (PRD 7 Item 05 36)
1. PURPOSE 1.1. The purpose of this item is to update the Committee on progress with the investigation of the many flooding issues that the June 2015 storm event identified in Whanganui, specifically the completion of the Awarua Stream component of this investigation programme.
2. RECOMMENDATION That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-153.
3. FINANCIAL IMPACT 3.1. There is no financial impact arising from this item.
4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 4.1. Whanganui District Council (WDC) staff have recently consulted with Wikitoria Road residents around the findings of the technical report.
5. SIGNIFICANT BUSINESS RISK IMPACT 5.1. There is no significant business risk associated with this report.
6. BACKGROUND 6.1. A report to the 15 December 2015 Council meeting informed members of the establishment of a Whanganui Flood Management Review Group (the Review Group) comprising officers from WDC and Horizons Regional Council (HRC) together with two representatives of Whanganui River iwi. The Review Group has now met on six occasions, most recently on 21 June.
7. DISCUSSION 7.1. The primary focus of the 21 June meeting was to agree on a final version of the technical report summarising investigation and analysis undertaken by HRC staff relating to Awarua Stream flood hazard, specifically the June 2015 flooding of some Wikitoria Road properties. Some difference of opinion existed within the Review Group as to the extent of investigations and analysis required, primarily the level of detail required around detention as a realistic mitigation option given costs and practicalities. Nevertheless in the interests of working collaboratively, further investigation and analysis was undertaken with the report subsequently finalised at the 21 June meeting. The technical report is not appended to this report but is available on demand.
Summary on the Awarua FLood Mitigation Investigations Report (PRD 05 36) Page 55
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
7.2. The report essentially identified the exacerbating effect that WDC infrastructure has on Awarua Stream flood hazard upstream of Wikitoria Road and identified that improved conveyance of flow under Wikitoria Road was the most effective technical solution. Other mitigation strategies generate residual risks that in the view of HRC technical staff, are not
Item 7 Item desirable and best avoided. 7.3. The question of HRC’s involvement beyond the investigation/ analysis stage has been raised on several occasions. The response provided was that the operational demands currently placed on the HRC River Management Group are such that it would need to sit behind a number of other implementation projects. Given the background and context it was the view of HRC staff that it would be more appropriate for WDC to take ownership of the issue. WDC staff were intending to consult with Wikitoria Road residents in mid-July, with a view to further WDC discussion (what mitigation strategy, if any, WDC might pursue and how they might choose to fund it) when it next meets on 23-24 August.
8. TIMELINE / NEXT STEPS 8.1. The next technical matter to be addressed by the Review Group is the flood hazard relating to Ngatarua Stream immediately north of the Awarua Stream catchment. This work will also be undertaken by HRC technical staff and is programmed to commence early in the new calendar year.
9. SIGNIFICANCE 9.1. This is not a significant decision according to the Council’s Policy on Significance and Engagement.
Ramon Strong GROUP MANAGER RIVER MANAGEMENT
ANNEXES There are no attachments for this report.
Summary on the Awarua FLood Mitigation Investigations Report (PRD 05 36) Page 56
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Report No. 16-154 Information Only - No Decision Required
ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE JUNE 2015 FLOOD ON THE WHANGANUI URBAN 8 Item AREA (PRD 05 36)
1. PURPOSE 1.1. The purpose of this item is to provide Council with a broad assessment of the economic impact of the June 2015 Whanganui River flood on the Whanganui urban area.
2. RECOMMENDATION That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-154 together with Annexure A.
3. FINANCIAL IMPACT 3.1. There is no financial impact arising from the recommendation contained within this item.
4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 4.1. It is expected that the information contained in this item will be incorporated into discussions proposed to be held with the Whanganui community in early 2017 around current flood risk and what appetite exists for increasing levels of service.
5. SIGNIFICANT BUSINESS RISK IMPACT 5.1. There is no significant business risk associated with this item.
6. BACKGROUND 6.1. An extreme rainfall event on 19 and 20 June 2015 in the mid to lower section of the Whanganui River catchment resulted in the highest flood levels in the Lower Whanganui River since records began. The peak flow at Town Bridge has been assessed as 5,158 cumecs, which equates to an Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) of 0.77%, or an estimated return period of 130 years. 6.2. The flood did not coincide with high tide, nor was there any significant storm surge and accordingly flood levels were lower than they would otherwise have been, particularly downstream of Town Bridge. 6.3. The flood peak was well contained within the new 0.5% AEP design stopbank at Balgownie, but overtopped, by some 400 to 500 mm, the stopbank at Kowhai Park/ Anzac Parade, recently upgraded to contain the 3.3% AEP (30 year) flood with 300 mm of freeboard. The river also inundated the unprotected floodable areas at Putiki and Taupo Quay. 6.4. The river flooded a significant number of houses, primarily at Anzac Parade and Putiki, along with approximately 28 businesses in the vicinity of Taupo Quay. In addition, flooding and associated heavy sedimentation caused substantial damage to Kowhai Park and to various other parks, community facilities and infrastructure.
Economic Impacts of the June 2015 Flood on the Whanganui Urban Area (PRD 05 36) Page 57
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
6.5. The economic impact over the past 13 months, in terms of response, recovery and damage reinstatement costs, together with business losses and opportunity costs attributable to that event, has been considerable and that impact is still being felt in some areas. At the June 2016 Council meeting a report was requested that provided information
Item 8 Item on the cost of the June 2015 event, specifically the costs relating to river flooding within the Whanganui urban area that flood protection infrastructure may have been able to offset.
7. DISCUSSION 7.1. The June 2015 storm had a pronounced impact on the Whanganui district but was felt in many other parts of the Region. Accordingly, being able to clearly itemise costs to a particularly geographic area has a number of inherent difficulties. In some cases costs relate to the event, such as those incurred in running the Emergency Operations Centre (EOC). Some also have a degree of commercial sensitivity (eg insurance claims) while others have sensitivities for the property owner (eg impacts on property values). In some instances an estimate can be made of costs relating to a particularly geographic area. In other cases it can be reasonably assumed that overall cost is largely a fixed cost that would have remained largely the same had the event been contained to the Whanganui urban area. 7.2. It is acknowledged that some of the organisations that were involved in the event and who incurred significant costs as a result, exist to a large degree for the purpose of responding to emergency events such as that which occurred in June 2015 and accordingly their involvement in the event was ‘business as usual’. In particular, the Police, Fire Service and New Zealand Army have a primary role of responding to emergencies. Nevertheless, each of those organisations incurred significant additional and un-budgeted costs in responding to the emergency in Whanganui and it can reasonably be assumed that other important planned projects had to be deferred as a consequence. 7.3. In a similar vein it could be argued that Horizons Regional Council (HRC) and Whanganui District Council (WDC) have already budgeted for ‘normal’ staff hours and accordingly only additional staff costs covering overtime and casual labour should be taken into account. The contrary argument is that those ‘normal’ hours were budgeted for initiatives agreed with the respective communities through Annual Plans and the deferral of those initiatives presumably has an economic impact elsewhere, either through an opportunity cost arising from delayed implementation of an initiative or the need to impose additional rates to fund that initiative at a future time. Total staff costs for HRC were recorded and accounted for in this report. However, WDC did not record those costs and a conservative allowance has been made that reflects additional costs rather than base costs. 7.4. Unfortunately, many of the costs incurred as a direct result of the flood in the Whanganui urban area are unable to be separately identified. The greatest impact of the flood was on private residential and commercial property and neither insured nor un-insured damage costs are available. The New Zealand Insurance Council (NZIC) collects data pertaining to events rather than areas. The total cost to its members arising from the June 2015 event, which extended over the Horowhenua, Wairarapa, Taranaki and Whanganui areas was $41.5 million. That sum included $23 million of damage to residential property, $6.2 million to commercial property and $3.9 million of business interruption costs. While some further detail relating to numbers of claims is available from NZIC, it is not sufficient to make any meaningful assessment of the proportion that relate to river inundation of urban/ commercial parts of Whanganui. A very conservative estimate would be the $4.75 million figure previously reported by WDC, a figured based on an assumed repair cost of $50,000 for the 95 dwellings that were flooded. 7.5. Estimating the cost to property owners of un-insured damage and deductibles applied to insured damage is an inherently difficult task. The NZIC advises that 97% of residential
Economic Impacts of the June 2015 Flood on the Whanganui Urban Area (PRD 05 36) Page 58
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
properties in New Zealand are insured, however there is quite a spread within that average, depending on socio-economic factors. Whanganui District Council have assessed that 93% of damaged private dwellings were covered by insurance. The
proportion of property owners with contents insurance is likely to be less. Item 8 Item 7.6. Costs associated with the event can be broadly categorised as follows: Event response costs. These primarily relate to the substantial inputs of staff time by the many organisations involved in monitoring the event, undertaking field actions to minimise impacts, evacuating people and providing for personal safety and property security. In addition, some costs were incurred for machinery/ equipment hire, material purchases and accommodation, particularly in respect of welfare. These costs were incurred within two weeks of the June 2015 event.
Event recovery costs. Substantial costs were incurred by many community organisations and property owners in clearing floodwater and sediment from parks, roads and private/ commercial properties and in getting various services functioning again. The costs, as scheduled below, largely relate to the urban area. No account has been taken of the substantial costs incurred by WDC in relation to the reinstatement of damage to roading and stormwater infrastructure as that was largely a cost outside the urban area. Most of these costs were brought to charge in the 2015-16 year, although there are still some outstanding costs in the WDC parks and property restoration area.
Costs for reinstatement of damaged infrastructure and property. By far the greatest economic impact is in this category. The cost of damage to WDC and HRC infrastructure can be identified with reasonable accuracy (a total of approximately $1.6 million) and the cost of damage to power and communication services would be expected to be something less than that. Damage to private residential and commercial property was substantial but that cost is not able to be quantified. Much of the reinstatement work is still outstanding and significant costs have yet to be incurred, particularly by WDC and insurance companies. 7.7. Where available, costs pertaining to each of the above categories are shown in the table attached at Annex A. For reasons explained above, absolute values for some of the more substantial economic impacts of the June 2015 flood are not readily obtainable. Nevertheless, the table does provide a good indication of the breadth and very substantial scale of that impact. 7.8. Referencing Annex A, a very rudimentary estimate of river related flood damage costs (those relating individuals/ home owners, local, regional and central government and the private sector) to the urban part of Whanganui is likely to lie somewhere between $7 million and $15 million.
8. SIGNIFICANCE 8.1. This is not a significant decision according to the Council’s Policy on Significance and Engagement.
Allan Cook Ramon Strong PROJECT ENGINEER GROUP MANAGER RIVER MANAGEMENT
ANNEXES A June 2015 Whanganui Flood - Schedule of Costs
Economic Impacts of the June 2015 Flood on the Whanganui Urban Area (PRD 05 36) Page 59
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
TABLE A
JUNE 2015 WHANGANUI RIVER FLOOD – ECONOMIC IMPACTS Item 8 Item Category Costs incurred by Description Quantum Horizons Regional Council (HRC) Response and recovery (primarily response) activity including EOC $364,000 total cost across Region ($193,000 additional to budgeted hours). A staffing, field observations and emergency measures, flood pumping. substantial proportion of that would have been incurred had the event been confined to Whanganui. New Zealand Army Event response involving transport (Unimogs), liaison and cordon roles. Additional costs of $20,000 (no provision for wages and salaries). Total of 90 persons involved over 10 days. NZ Police Event response. Wanganui staff input treated as ‘business as usual’. Significant additional costs incurred for travel, accommodation and overtime. Detailed However additional 55 staff brought in from other Districts for numbers not available maintaining cordons to ensure property security. Whanganui District Council (WDC)/ Response welfare, including accommodation. $180,000 over District. Estimate $120,000 applicable to Whanganui urban.
Response Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM) WDC Additional staff costs, including time-in-lieu, for response. Conservative estimate of $50k overall, estimate $25k for Whanganui urban. Full staff cost not recorded.
Red Cross Welfare through response and recovery phases. 12 teams deployed. Costs unknown. 401 persons registered as evacuated. WDC Parks and property clean-up (insurable). $797,000 - insurable with $100k deductible. WDC Parks and property clean-up (non-insurable). $373,000.
WDC $200,000 contribution to Manawatu-Wanganui Disaster Relief Fund $200,000. AnnexA Trust. Welfare Support Hub Ongoing welfare support from Work and Income, IRD, Housing Costs generally unknown, apart from Work and Income $83,500 to Corporation, Te Puni Kokiri and Te Oranganui Iwi Health Authority. 18 August 2015 and Te Oranganui $40,000. NZ Fire Service Response and recovery. Assisting with evacuations, pumping out $61,400 for additional wages, travel, accommodation and meals. Business as usual
floodwater, flushing streets and infrastructure. Crews flown in from other costs, including plant charges not included.
districts. Private Property Owners/ Mayoral Residential property clean-up as reflected in formal applications for $800,000 – only partly covered by MRF. Relief Fund (MRF) assistance to MRF.
Recovery Taupo Quay Businesses (28 Commercial clean-up as reflected in formal applications for assistance $304,000. affected) through MRF. Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Applications for assistance from urban area. Approximately $300,000. Disaster Relief Fund Various Businesses Business interruption or closure e.g. Kowhai Park Dairy closed for 12 WDC estimate of net immediate effect on the CBD is $590,000 in lost sales. months? Taupo Quay business impacts. Putiki Marae Marae and Kohangarao clean-up and repairs. Costs unknown but significant. Various community organisations Miscellaneous costs as reflected through formal requests for assistance $67,000. through MRF. WDC/ MCDEM Water supply and wastewater infrastructure repair (stormwater and $1.49 million.
roading infrastructure is largely rural and excluded accordingly).
HRC/ MCDEM Flood infrastructure damage reinstatement – primarily at Kowhai Park/ $109,500. Anzac Parade. Insurers and Policy Holders Damage to insured private property and contents, including vehicles. $41.5 million for overall event affecting Taranaki, Whanganui, Horowhenua, Wairarapa. Disaggregated numbers for Whanganui not available. Very conservative WDC estimate
Long-term alternative accommodation. of $4.75million. Infrastructure
Reinstatement Property Owners Damage to un-insured private property and contents, plus deductibles Costs unknown but expected to be significant. applied to insured damage. Service Companies Damage to services including telephone, power and gas. Costs unknown but significant.
Economic Impacts of the June 2015 Flood on the Whanganui Urban Area (PRD 05 36) Page 61
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Report No. 16-155 Information Only - No Decision Required
SUSTAINABLE LAND USE INITIATIVE (SLUI) 9 Item
1. PURPOSE 1.1. This report is to update Members about progress on Council’s Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) for the period 19th May to 30th June 2016.
2. RECOMMENDATION That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-155 and Annexes.
3. FINANCIAL IMPACT 3.1. There are no direct financial impacts associated with this report, however it does update Members on a number of financial matters associated with SLUI.
4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 4.1. Consultation was carried out through the 2012-22 Long-Term Plan submission process. 4.2. The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) has a key role in funding and overseeing this activity. 4.3. The SLUI Advisory Group is updated every six months on progress with this programme and receives copies of these agenda items. The last group meeting was held on the 10th May 2016.
5. SIGNIFICANT BUSINESS RISK IMPACT 5.1. There are no significant risks inherent in the adoption of recommendations contained in this report.
6. BACKGROUND 6.1. SLUI has been in operation in our region since 2006. The initiative, targeting hill country erosion, is funded from Central Government’s Hill Country Erosion Fund (HCEF), Horizons’ rates and farmer contributions. 6.2. SLUI is delivered in partnership with the HCEF and MPI through a contracted works programme which sets targets for plans and works completed. 6.3. This report completes the first year of a four year contract until June 2019. 6.4. The 2015-19 contract targets have been agreed with MPI. The contract document was finalised in late December 2015 and signed off in early February 2016.
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 63
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
The agreed contract targets are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Contract Targets Contract Target 2015-16 2016-17
Item 9 Item WFP Completed (no.) n/a n/a WFP area mapped (ha) 25,000 20,000 Area mapped in target catchments (ha) 17,500 14,000 Afforestation (ha) Retirement (ha) 1,700 1,980 Riparian Retirement (ha) Managed Retirement (ha) Poles planted (no.) 24,000 26,000 Area protected by space pole planting (ha) 800 820 Other non retirement (ha)
7. REPORT ON PROGRESS
Whole Farm Plan Development 7.1. The contract target for 2015-16 was 25,000 ha. Table 2 summarises progress toward WFP development by plan as it is not possible to accurately calculate the area of the farms until the final maps have been completed.
Table 2: Whole Farm Plan Development to 30 June 2016 Whole Farm Plan Development Contract 1 Contract 2 Contract 3
2006-10 2010-14 2014-15 2015-16 Farms Mapped *1 289 247 63 37 Plans Completed *2 289 247 63 32 Plans Delivered *3 289 247 63 22 Cumulative *4 289 536 599 631 Notes: *1 Number of farms physically mapped (the majority of these are contracted to LandVision Ltd). *2 Number of plans completed, including mapping, financial, physical document, and entered into HRC tracking system. *3 Plans delivered and presented to landowner (this signals start of implementation process and Stage 1 of SLUI having been completed). *4 Cumulative total of completed WFPs.
7.2. A spreadsheet to manage priority assessment is continually updated for proposed WFPs. The priority list for 2015-16 WFPs had 49 plans covering approximately 32,736 ha (131% of the hectare target). Only 37 of these plans were completed in 2015-16, however this was in excess of the target with 28,771 ha mapped (115% of target). The remaining plans will become top priority for 2016-17. Staff have documentation out with a further 33 landowners who are considering getting a WFP, this will potentially fill our target for 2016- 17. 7.3. The contract with MPI states that 70% of our target mapped area will be undertaken within the priority catchment areas. This would equate to 17,500 ha. There were 20,713 ha mapped within these areas (118%).
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 64
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Implementation 7.4. Implementation of individual farm plans generally begins the year following completion of the WFP. The SLUI programme budgets on implementation taking at least five years to
complete the major works and longer to complete a pole planting programme. In Table 2 Item 9 Item the emphasis is on plan production, originally against the plan target. The target is now based on area completion, not number of plans. The tables below are presented to give an indication of plan uptake or implementation. 7.5. We are continually reviewing all plans delivered to landowners and those who have never been active or haven’t been active for some time are reviewed and the landowner is re- contacted every year or so. Table 5 refers to the changes in implementation of SLUI farm plans over time. 7.6. Table 3 looks at the uptake from recently completed plans. This table aims to give an indication of how successful the programme is in getting completed plans delivered to clients, discussed and agreed. Works will start either when finances are available or at the next planting season.
Table 3: Implementation Progress to 30 June 2016 Implementation of Plans by Year of Completion 2013-14 Plans 2014-15 Plans 2015-16 Plans Measure At 30 June at 28 Aug 2015 To date Plans Completed 55 63 32 Plans Doing Works 53 58 19 % Plans Doing Works 96% 92% 60% Notes: Internal targets have been set for these measures but there are no contractual requirements. Targets are as follows: - In the year following the plan being completed the % plans “doing works” will be; o 1 July following – 50% doing works o 1 October following – 75% doing works o 1 January following – 90% doing works.
7.7. Once implementation programmes begin, staff will visit landowners to give advice on location and technical needs for work, help assess costs, agree on grant rates and on how and by who the works will be completed. Once the work has been completed staff will inspect the work and help landowners make a claim for the grant available. This is then recorded against the Incentives and Works programme as shown in Table 4.
Incentives and Works (Grant Projects and Council Funded Projects) 7.8. For the financial year to 30 June 2016 the 394 individual implementation projects completed have had a grant cost of $1,491,342. This was matched by a landowner share of $2,279,756. The work types, cost and hectares treated are summarised in Table 4.
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 65
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Table 4: Work Types and Grants 1 July 2015 – 30 June 2016 Hectares Number of Grant Rate – Work Type Total Cost ($) Grant Paid ($) Treated Claims Average (%)
(Ha) Item 9 Item Afforestation 20 916,862 181,129 20 780 Retirement 45 660,156 305,723 46 664 Riparian retirement 95 1,514,509 726,661 48 623 Wetland retirement 12 92,214 45,281 49 16 Managed retirement 9 80,069 36,072 45 79 Space planting 166 347,062 158,734 46 653 Gully Planting 28 53,195 25,457 48 61 Structures & earthworks 16 100,233 8,886 9 38 Other 3 6,797 3,398 50 1 Grand Total 394 3,771,098 1,491,342 40 2,914
7.9. Claims for works completed in 2015-16 are 106% by number and 116% by grant cost compared to 2014-15. This is the most claims completed in a financial year. The bulk of claims by dollar value are for riparian retirement and by number are for space and gully planting. 7.10. Works completed and claimed represent 117% of the contract target for 2015-16.
7.11. The breakdown of work completed by type and grant are shown in Graphs 2 and 3.
Graph 1: Area of SLUI works completed in 2015-16 Context: this graph takes information provided in table 4, showing the types of work completed this year, with a further breakdown within each bar to show the amount of each type of work completed on the various land erodibility classes.
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 66
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
7.12. Map C annexed to this report shows the location of proposed works against works to date. Item 9 Item
Graph 2: Cost of SLUI works completed in 2015-16 Context: this graph takes information provided in table 4, showing the grant cost of each type of work completed this year.
Graph 3: Area of SLUI works completed in relation to mapped farm plan area Context: This graph shows the life to date areas of SLUI work completed on the various land erodibility classes. The breakdown in each bar shows the land already in trees (light green), the land that was already in trees but
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 67
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
has had SLUI works completed (dark green), the land that was in pasture but has had SLUI works completed
(red), and the land in pasture still to be treated (shades of blue). As at May 2016 we have completed work on 14% of the top priority land, 7% of the highly erodible land, 4% of the erodible land and 1% of the not erodible. 7.13. Staff have a grant allocation in which to manage individual work programmes with their
Item 9 Item clients. In addition there is a centralised approval and allocation system for any works over $20,000 grant, where applications must be made by the landowner. There was $1.789M allocated for works in 2015/16 and $1.491 (83%) was claimed. 7.14. Every year there is a difficult balance to achieve between agreeing with a landowner on a work programme and having sufficient budget to pay for that work should it go ahead. In 2015/16 83% of the work proposed went ahead. Reasons for works not proceeding included; the 2015 storm, unavailability of fencers, run out of time at end of financial year, changes in farming budgets. Activity and Contract Management 7.15. The autumn and early winter has been warm and wet throughout the region, however recent rains in the Tararua District still leave farmers with reasonably low soil moisture levels. Grass growth has been reasonable, with few frosts. In wetter areas feed loss through trampling and pugging is a concern. 7.16. The dry autumn did result in some early cancellations for pole orders as farmers were concerned conditions would be too dry for planting. This concern is largely alleviated now, with some areas in the east still an exception. Some farmers have come back to re order. 7.17. In the last report it was noted there was still a large amount of work to be completed before the 30th June cut off. The vast majority of the outstanding work was for fencing for bush or riparian retirement. It was noted there was still around $800,000 of grant claims to come to charge. June was particularly busy, farmers completed works and around $550,000 of grant costs came through the books. 7.18. The 2015-16 Mitigation package was approved at a cost of $96,000. There were 41 projects completed with a grant cost of $51,933. The 2016/17 projects will be completed this winter and the final wrap up cost reported to this committee once all the claims have been processed. The final cost will not exceed the approved funding. 7.19. The final invoice has been sent to MPI, requesting the outstanding $305,802.20 of the $1,331,108 contract. MPI will await our final report including contract targets and financials before approving final payment. 7.20. The “Whole Farm Plans: A vehicle for implementing policy” survey with Ministry for the Environment (MfE) is continuing. An agreement was signed with AgResearch for funding and delivery of the survey. 7.21. The survey work has been completed. This was carried out by Dr Willie Smith and AgResearch staff. Dr Smith completed additional surveys through 12 Horizons field officers and three extension/farm consultants. 7.22. Following on from the Council workshop in March staff have agreed on a format and process to undertake plan reviews and five year programmes. At this stage staff are busy completing pole delivery and winter planting programmes. Following this reviews will be the priority. Eight reviews have been completed to date. 7.23. Over the reporting period staff have only made contact with one WFP holder who has not undertaken works, he is still not keen on works. 7.24. A proposal to plant a farm near Taihape in Manuka has raised some concerns. The new landowner has applied for AGS and a SLUI WFP. Locals believe we will be paying grant in addition to any AGS received. We would support Manuka as a land use change on the LUC Class 7 land but if the area is funded by AGS we will not add more funding.
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 68
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 9 Item
Figure 1: Land in Taihape area earmarked for afforestation with Manuka (Libby Owen)
7.25. At the March Catchment Operations Committee meeting councilors will recall a time lapse video of an earthflow at Utiku. Massey University are interested to see if lowering the water level of the swamp/wetland above the earthflow will have any effect on the movement. Lowering the water level requires a consent and staff are assisting the landowner through this process. 7.26. Work on Joint Venture forests: Chisholm – boundary fence between McQuades and Chisholm completed, Arbour forest to be billed their share; DeRoles – discussion with Deroles about new Trustees appointments; McGregor – forestry inspection completed, planning started for first thin; McIntosh – Compartment 28, thin of eucalyptus species completed; Seddon – no work or contact; Silk – meeting re grazing in August; Steele – re flown area added to working files and maps; Stellingwerf – issues regarding the JV and proposed land sale to neighbour (Thompson), he is happy for Horizons to advance a solution Thompson – see Stellingwerf; Wickham – no work or contact Other work – awaiting final response from insurers regarding slip insurance from June 2015 event, checking through all forestry rights assessing agreements, have asked lawyer for position regarding partial sale of land with Forestry Right and Term Loan, completed valuation for our external auditors.
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 69
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
ANNUAL PROGRESS 7.27. The following graphs and table are presented bi-monthly but are generally best looked upon as an annual report of progress. Graph 5 will be updated through a Landcare
Research report every two years. Table 5 will at best be updated six monthly. Item 9 Item
Graph 4: SLUI works completed by work type over the life of the programme Context: Works completed over the life of the programme with the MPI contract target
Graph 5: Possible cumulative sediment reduction once the works are mature Context: Using Landcare Research SEDNET NZ, the works as they are completed will begin to have an effect on reducing sediment from erosion. This reduction (of works vs pasture or unretired land) will gradually increase as the trees reach maturity. These sediment reductions assume maturity of works. They are cumulative as more works are completed.
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 70
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
7.28. Changes in implementation of SLUI farm plans completed to June 2013. Table 5: Changes in implementation of WFP completed to June 2013
Updated status Change over 12 Number of farms Status at May 15 9 Item at May 16 months
>80% Substantial progress 80 87 + 7 51-80% significant progress 41 46 + 5 21-50% Good progress 97 108 + 11
1-20% Some progress 157 147 -10 0% No Funded progress 97 85 -12 0% No prospect of progress 9 9 0 Total 0% -20% 263 241 -22 Context: This table looks at the rate of WFP implementation over time. In this case the plans assessed are those completed up until June 2013. This allows 2 years for landowners to begin implementing their work programme. The change in implementation over each 12 month period is then recorded. The aim will be to see more plans making good, significant or substantial progress and less plans making some, no funded or no prospect of progress. Of significant interest is the desire to reduce the number of plans making no progress.
Note; this table has not been updated since being presented to Council in May, however we can report that one No Funded Progress WFP has now started a work programme.
8. SIGNIFICANCE 8.1. This is not a significant decision according to the Council’s Policy on Significance and Engagement.
Grant Cooper MANAGER - LAND
Jon Roygard GROUP MANAGER NATURAL RESOURCES & PARTNERSHIPS
ANNEXES A SLUI Target Parcels B SLUI Overview and Plan Progress C SLUI Mapped Priority Land D SLUI Works Tracking
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 71
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 9 Item
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 72
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 9 Item
AnnexA
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 73
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 9 Item
AnnexB
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 74
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 9 Item
AnnexC
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 75
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 9 Item
AnnexD
Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Page 76
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Report No. 16-156 Decision Required
REGIONAL COAST & LAND OPERATIONAL PLAN 2016-17 10 Item
1. PURPOSE 1.1. This item is to present to Members the following draft Operational Plans for 2016-17. Regional Coast & Land Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) Whanganui Catchment Strategy 1.2. Management are seeking endorsement of these plans.
2. RECOMMENDATION That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-156 and Annexes. b. recommends that Council formally adopt and release the 2016-17 Operational Plans as annexed to this item.
3. FINANCIAL IMPACT 3.1. There are no financial impacts associated with this item. The operational plan reflects previously endorsed budgets approved as part of Council’s annual planning and long term planning processes.
4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 4.1. The community have had the opportunity to comment on budgetary aspects of the operational plans referred to in this item as part of the engagement and submissions run during the long term planning processes. Copies of these documents will be made available to the community via Council’s website as they are formally released.
5. SIGNIFICANT BUSINESS RISK IMPACT 5.1. There is no significant business risk associated with this item.
6. DISCUSSION 6.1. The three Operational Plans presented represent year two of the current LTP. There are no changes to the approved LTP budgets within these plans. The Operational plans highlight the works programmes proposed for the financial year. The major points worth noting are: 6.2. Regional Coast & Land The soil health budget and work output has increased slightly this year as we complete the new national monitoring programme for soil quality
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 77
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Finalise a new partnership agreement to continue to run the Ballance Farm Environment Awards within our region. As we continue with the SLUI programme the demand for poles is forecast to continue to increase, this will put pressure on internal and external supply of poles. We will
Item 10 Item consider our options for future pole supply in our region. This may involve presentation of a business case to Council. 6.3. Sustainable Land Use Initiative Slight budget changes are reflected in the mantra; “less plans, more works”, see Sect 4.3 and 4.4 of the Operational Plan. The contract with Ministry for Primary Industries requires a 10 year review of SLUI. This will be scoped and potentially started this year with the aim of finding an outside consultant to carry out this work. Continue to improve SLUI reporting, including proof of targeting of works. Undertake and report back on the first tranche of individual plan reviews and five year works programmes. Continue to report on progress at bringing plans with no works into the works programme. Receive and report to Council the outcomes from the survey of Whole Farm Plans. Work with Science and Landcare Research to improve the ability of SedNet NZ to model SLUI outcomes. Carry out a number of on farm case studies, making information available to wider community. Investigate a mechanism of allocation of grant funds which will allow some flexibility to the works programme and budgets.
6.4. Whanganui Catchment Strategy No major changes anticipated, enter into discussions with Whanganui River Enhancement Trust regarding their strategic plan.
7. SIGNIFICANCE 7.1. This is not a significant decision according to the Council’s Policy on Significance and Engagement.
Jon Roygard GROUP MANAGER NATURAL RESOURCES & PARTNERSHIPS
ANNEXES A Regional Coast and Land Operational Plan 2016-17 B SLUI Operational Plan 2016-17 C Whanganui Catchment Strategy Operational Plan 2016-17
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 78
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
10 Item
Regional Land and Coastal Operational Plan 2016-17
AnnexA
July 2016
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 79
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
Endorsed by Council at the Catchment Operations meeting on xxx
Author Dave Harrison, Environmental Coordinator – Regional Land Initiatives Malcolm Todd, Environmental Coordinator – Monitoring John Jamieson, Environmental Coodinator - Forestry Grant Cooper, Environmental Manager (Land)
Acknowledgements to Horizons Regional Council
Front Cover Photo Horizons Regional Council
AnnexA
July 2016 Report No: 2015/EXT/1484 ISBN: 978-1-927259-53-5
CONTACT 24 hr Freephone 0508 800 800 [email protected] www.horizons.govt.nz
Kairanga Cnr Rongotea and Levin Kairanga-Bunnythorpe 11 Bruce Road Roads Palmerston North Palmerston North 11-15 Victoria Avenue Taihape SERVICE REGIONAL DEPOTS Torere Road CENTRES HOUSES Marton Wanganui Ohotu Hammond Street 181 Guyton Street Woodville Taumarunui 116 Vogel Street 34 Maata Street
POSTAL Horizons Regional Council, Private Bag 11025, Manawatu Mail Centre, Palmerston North 4442 F 06 9522 929 ADDRESS
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 80
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
CONTENTS
1 Introduction 5
1.1 Background 5 Item 10 Item 1.2 Purpose of the Operational Plan 5 2 Actions and Expenditure 7 2.1 Regional and Coast 7 2.2 Soil Health 9 2.3 Industry Partnerships 10 2.4 Nurseries 14 3 Targets and Summary Expenditure 19 3.1 Summary Expenditure 19 3.2 Targets 19 3.3 Environmental Grant – Regional and Coast 20 4 Reporting 21
4.1 Bi Monthly 21
4.2 Annual Report 21 4.3 Community Plan 21 5 Appendices 23
5.1 Supporting Maps 23 AnnexA 5.2 Environmental Grant Locations 24
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 81
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexA
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 82
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
1 Introduction
1.1 Background Item 10 Item The activities described in this Operational Plan form part of the Catchment Management group of activities in Council’s Long-term Plan 2015-25, pp 37- 41. Under the Resource Management Act 1991, Horizons has statutory responsibilities to ensure sustainable use and management of the Region’s land and soil resource. The Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) is now the major focus in tackling accelerated erosion problems in our Region’s hill country. The activities undertaken within this Operational Plan provide for a wider range of work to a wider range of our region’s ratepayers, and continue to treat “hot spot” erosion issues as they arise outside the SLUI programme. This work-stream also funds work programmes that the Hill Country Erosion Fund will not support. The activities link directly to the non regulatory methods of the One Plan (Chapter 5, Policies 5-1 and 5-5), but the Whanganui Catchment Strategy (WCS) is subject to a separate Operational Plan. Implementation of the land rules of the One Plan will involve Policy 5-2A regarding
regulation of vegetation clearance, land disturbance, forestry and cultivation.
1.2 Purpose of the Operational Plan
This plan aims to set out the scope, work types and targets to be delivered within the
approved funding: AnnexA . Scope – work is divided into four budget areas (see Section 2). To some extent it is not possible to completely differentiate the work being carried out from SLUI or WCS as there will always be overlaps, but in general the work plans are; Regional and Coast – primarily within the catchments outside the WCS, lower priority areas for SLUI, and on coastal dune areas throughout the region. Soil Health – this has a dual focus; on providing soil advice and monitoring information (e.g to farmers, land agent, staff) and for state of the environment monitoring. The primary focus is on higher value soils and work relating more specifically to soil issues rather than water quality, but inevitably there are links between the two. Industry Partnerships – region-wide support for initiatives to promote sustainable land use. Nurseries – to provide poplar and willow material to supplement supplies for erosion control works throughout the region, including the SLUI and WCS programmes, and also to provide a “charging account” for purchases made to on- sell (poles, Dynex sleeves, Netlon sleeves and pine seedlings predominantly). WCS – noted here but reported with its own Operational Plan as this project receives considerable third party funding support from the Whanganui River Enhancement Trust. SLUI – noted here but reported with its own Operational Plan as this project receives considerable third party support from the Government (via Ministry of Primary Industries) funded Hill Country Erosion Fund. With the implementation of the One Plan, the land issues regarding cultivation, earth disturbance, vegetation clearance and forestry will require advice and issuing of consents. The decision has been made that this work will be carried out and charged within normal operational activities and so is charged here.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 83
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
. Types of work – staff provide information, advice and assistance as required. Much of the work is to be reactive, in response to requests from ratepayers and existing clients. This differs from SLUI and WCS, which are both much more proactive. There are areas of work where it is planned that staff will be much more active in engaging with
Item 10 Item the community. Implementation of the One Plan rules are reactive, but also have some time limits imposed upon them so inspections and reporting need to take place often at the expense of other work; . Targets – it is often difficult to set specific outcome focused targets for projects which are advisory and reactive. The main targets set relate to providing a timely service to ratepayers within a variety of work areas; and . Funding – as outlined in the Community Plan, this work is to be funded from the General rate. It was expected that some of the work would drop off as SLUI brings in more of the traditional clients dealt with through this work. Funding has dropped off over time (by approximately $150,000 and 2,600 staff hours) but staff have worked much smarter in delivering similar levels of output. The quantum of work required to meet requests for advice and consents surrounding land use consents is becoming clearer and the mix of ongoing education, as well as the actual consent processing, is approximately 600-700 staff hours per year.
.
AnnexA
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 84
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
2 Actions and Expenditure
2.1 Regional and Coast
This work continues the pre-SLUI primary function of the Environmental Management 10 Item Officers (Land). Traditionally, this work was mostly reactive and focused on giving advice to landowners about erosion and land use when asked. However, since the late 1990s changes have been made by incorporating farm environment plans and priority catchment approaches. Staff have provided advice and information to largely rural landowners and Environmental Grant funds for eligible erosion control, water quality and biodiversity works. SLUI promotion has increased the profile of sustainable land use issues, not only affecting hill country, and the last few years have brought increased numbers of requests for assistance from owners of semi-rural and lifestyle blocks. As the budget has decreased in this area, staff have had to work smarter; Environmental Plans have been simplified and less time is spent on individual work programmes. The winter 2015 storm that affected Wanganui, Rangitikei and Manawatu Districts generated enquiries from landowners on landforms not normally associated with high rates of erosion. This resulted in more advice and Environmental Grant projects in these areas than would normally be expected.
Increased staffing in Biodiversity and Freshwater Quality has meant some of the work and
advice has been picked up by those areas. Staff in these groups liaise regularly to ensure Environmental Grant funding is directed to the most appropriate work stream and to ensure the most efficient delivery of advice to ratepayers. Work within the coastal area has been undertaken by the Land Team on areas considered to be from the foredune inland to the extent of the unstable coastal zone (i.e. not the coastal marine area as defined in the One Plan). Primarily, staff have been liaising with landowners, AnnexA local community groups, Territorial Local Authorities (TLAs), Department of Conservation (DoC), iwi and our own internal groups on issues such as dune stability and subdivisions. Approaches by landowners of unstable dune areas are dealt with as they arise and staff have funding set aside from the Environmental Grant fund to support stabilisation works. Usually this consists of two to three Environmental Grant projects on private land and a similar number on “community land” involving group cost- shared projects. The main focus for these projects is in the Rangitikei, Manawatu and Horowhenua Districts. The continued focus of this activity will be: . Provide information and advice to landowners, ratepayers and the public on erosion control and sustainable land use; . Promote and provide five environmental plans outside SLUI priority areas. These may be upgrades of the existing plans, new plans in lesser priority areas and simple plans and work programmes for lifestyle blocks; . Investigate the potential to work with Beef and Lamb New Zealand regarding provision of environmental plans (see Industry Partnerships section of this report); . Provide Environmental Grant funding for erosion control projects; . Support and liaise with Biodiversity and Freshwater teams to ensure advice is consistent and allocation of Environmental Grant is appropriate; . Provide staff to speak at field days, schools and special interest groups on land use and erosion issues; . Provide support, where appropriate to Accelerate>25, especially in areas of sheep and beef production and Manuka; . Provide free land use consents for cultivation, earth disturbance and vegetation clearance to landowners to the protocol signed off by Council; . Provide advice to landowners and others around the Permitted Activity status of forestry under the One Plan;
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 85
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
. Provide advice to Consents department regarding any full consent issues around land use; . Support and advise any existing or new coastal community groups and help with the resourcing of these groups where appropriate;
Item 10 Item . Liaise with other groups, agencies and authorities with an interest in the coastal environment and provide support and advice, particularly in the area of dune stability; . Provide specific advice to landowners and occupiers on dune and coastal erosion, and provide Environmental Grant support as appropriate; . Provide timely advice to ratepayers; . One Plan land use consenting must be given priority. The workload and timing of this work last year meant just over 600 hours (25%) of budgeted time was spent on activities relating to the One Plan; and . It should also be noted that a consultation is continuing around the development of a National Environmental Standard (NES) for forestry as a land use activity. Staff continue to liaise with Policy and MPI on this matter. It has been signalled that an NES may be introduced this year or early next year. .
Table 1: Summary of Expenditure (Regional and Coast) Internal Hours Staff time 2,390
Table 2: Overall budget up by $5,711 or 2% from 2015-16 Expenditure Funded By
AnnexA Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue $ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Regional and Coast 8,300 227,299 0 235,599 Environmental 80,000 0 0 80,000 Grants
Photo 1 : Malcolm Todd inspects gully control through pair planting of willows (photo Natalie Hyslop)
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 86
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
2.2 Soil Health
Soil health is an important regional issue, referred to in the non regulatory methods in the One Plan. The focus is on two main objectives: promoting sustainable soil management, and regional soil quality monitoring for State of the Environment (SoE) reporting. 10 Item 1. Promoting sustainable soil management Intensively cultivated or grazed soils are at risk of organic matter loss, compaction, pugging and subsequent runoff of sediment, nutrients and bacteria to waterways. Provision of sound advice to farmers is vital to enable them to: . Identify the often complex mix of soils on the their property; and . Monitor the effects of their management on soil quality, in order to; . Optimise the farm production system to the strengths and weaknesses of the soils present. Horizons activity in this area therefore encourages sustainable farm and regional development by tailoring management practices to soil resilience or vulnerability. This is done within the framework of a Soil Health Farm Plan, as well as providing advice at field days and responding to internal and external soil information requests. The Soil Health
Farm Plans incorporate farm visits, soil mapping, soil monitoring using Visual Soil Assessment (VSA), and provision of the farm plan. The plan contains soil maps, tables of soil properties, strengths and weaknesses, and recommendations for sustainable land use. The main focus of this activity will be: . Provide advice to landowners on intensively cultivated or grazed soils on risks of
organic matter loss, compaction, pugging and subsequent runoff of sediment, nutrients AnnexA and bacteria to waterways; . Promote the use of Visual Soil Assessment (VSA) as a farmer based monitoring and decision support tool through two workshops per year; . Manage allocation and sale of our Visual Soil Assessment manuals; . Provide Soil Health programmes on two properties, primarily through group promotion activities, especially via Monitor Farms; . Provide expert soil advice to external and internal clients; and . Maintain a close working relationship with Horizons Science team in order to coordinate soil and land use research needs.
2. Regional State of the Environment (SoE) soil quality monitoring Last year we implemented a formal SoE monitoring programme using the standard New Zealand regional council method. This year we will continue with this programme, expanding it to meet the minimum monitoring required across the region.
References 1. Land and Soil Monitoring: A guide for SoE and Regional Council Reporting; New Zealand, Land Monitoring Forum, 2009. 2. Visual Soil Assessment Volume 1: Field Guide for Cropping and Pastoral Grazing on Flat to Rolling Country; T G Shepherd, Landcare Research, 2000. 3. Visual Soil Assessment: Can We See What We Can Measure? T.G Shepherd, G. P. Sparling and M. D. Todd in Proceedings: Soil Quality and Sustainable Land Management Conference, by Peter Stephens, Jemma Callaghan and Anne Austin of Landcare Research, Palmerston North, 2002.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 87
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
4. Soil Quality on the Manawatu Plains. A report on results from soil surveys in 2003 and 2005. Malcolm Todd, Horizons Regional Council, 2006. Table 3: Summary of Expenditure (Soil Health) Internal Hours Staff time
475 Item 10 Item
Table 4: Overall budget up by $16,056 or 33% from 2015-16 Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue$ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Soil Health 25,600 39,620 0 65,220
AnnexA
Photo 2 : A soil quality monitoring site on Levin soil (M Todd)
2.3 Industry Partnerships
The Industry Partnership activity arose from the One Plan, but also formalised a number of activities and relationships that were already underway. The aim of this activity is to support initiatives that raise awareness of sustainable land use. Usually this support involves staff time but this activity also includes a significant amount of external expenditure, mostly in the form of sponsorship or subscription to organisations.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 88
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Sponsorship/subscriptions are currently provided to: . Ballance Farm Environment Awards - $25,000 (plus 200 hour internal labour @ $16,000). We are currently negotiating a new partnership agreement, providing a
commitment for a further two years to this programme; 10 Item . Poplar and Willow Research Trust - $23,000 and pole levy $3,000. Recently a new funding agreement was entered into, providing a commitment to a further four years to this research work; . Forest Research Programmes - $3,000. This commitment to dryland eucalyptus research ends this year; . Middle Districts Farm forestry Association - $3,000 to sponsor and provide input into the national conference to be held in Feilding; and . Sustainable Farming Fund Programmes – no commitments at this stage. . Fertiliser and Lime Research Workshop . Landwise These organisations also receive varying amounts of in-kind support through staff time. Other groups and organisations supported include: Beef and Lamb New Zealand, Middle Districts Farm Forestry Association, Land Managers Group, Land Monitoring Forum, New
Zealand Association of Resource Management (NZARM), Sheep and Beef Environment Group, fertiliser interests, farmer discussion groups and various industry research organisations. This activity will continue to focus on supporting a range of initiatives as well as taking a more direct involvement with industry groups that wish to develop codes of practice.
Programmes being supported will be reviewed periodically to ensure they are providing AnnexA value. This work area is largely about supporting Horizons’ profile regionally and nationally. Support for the science initiatives (i.e. the Sustainable Farming Fund (SFF) or Envirolink) are coordinated with the Science Team. The main focus of this activity will be: . Support to the annual Ballance Farm Environment Awards (BFEA) programme through sponsorship and staff support; . A new partnership agreement has been signed, this slight change of emphasis suggests the trust that runs the awards is looking to involve it’s regional partners more. Our staff are represented on the local management team and have very good input to the local organisation; . Support the Poplar and Willow Trust through subscriptions and staff support. This includes staff membership on the technical committee, and financial and administrative support directly to run the trust, for which we are reimbursed. The new subscription for the next four years provides some security of funding to the research work needed for poplar and willow material; . Provide support to Beef and Lamb NZ projects, including its Land Environment Plan activity as appropriate, and look to develop a partnership to provide Land Environmental Plans/Environmental Plans outside of the SLUI target catchments; . Develop an ongoing relationship with Massey University on its hill country experimental farm at Tuapaka; . Support SFF projects as appropriate; . Support forestry industry research where appropriate to our region; . Sponsor the Middle Districts Farm Forestry Association national conference. Horizons will provide a speaker to the main session and will run a field trip looking at forestry and land use issues in the region;
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 89
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
. Support industry staff development through New Zealand Association of Resource Management (NZARM); . Provide senior staff with membership of the Land Managers Group Special Interest Group (SIG), to support Regional Council Land Managers;
Item 10 Item . Provide senior and qualified staff to the Land Monitoring Forum SIG; . Malcolm Todd is a member of the LUC Technical Advisory Group and the LMF Erosion monitoring group; and . Support industry Codes of Practice (COP) as they are proposed.
Table 5: Summary of Expenditure (Industry Partnerships) Internal Hours Staff time 525
Table 6: Overall budget down by $1,144 or 1% from 2015-16 Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue$ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Industry 80,170 56,603 0 136,773
Partnerships
AnnexA
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 90
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexA
Figure 1: Industry Partnerships: Ballance Farm Environment Awards 2016, Winners montage
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 91
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
2.4 Nurseries
The landscape for nursery management is changing rapidly. In last years Operational Plan our focus was running Council nurseries to supplement supplies of erosion material consistent with those of commercial suppliers. This year we are facing the loss of our two
Item 10 Item major commercial suppliers and one more has indicated they will cease production within the next two to three years. We are now faced with a scenario of Horizons being the main source of supply supplemented by small commercial growers, farm nurseries, and our regional neighbours, who always aim to supply their own ratepayers as a priority. The Council owned or leased nurseries in Ruapehu, Rangitikei and Tararua districts are now vitally important in maintaining pole production for Environmental Grant and SLUI work programmes. We are faced with the need to increase production from our major nursery (a leased operation in Woodville), this will mean we will need to invest in capital and contractors to ensure supplies. A business case outlining the options regarding our future role in pole supply and demand, and council owned or operated nurseries will be presented to council this year. The decision made three years ago to lease land in an existing nursery (Murrays Nursery, Woodville) and contract an experienced nursery manager (David Murray) to grow poles for us has worked very well to date but as noted above, the need to grow the production, and to ensure supply means we will need to increase our commitment to this nursery.
Demand for pole material continues to grow, largely out of our SLUI programme but also as
a result of enquiries following the June 2015 storm. Winter 2016 pole demand is around 35,000 – 38,000 poles, well up on our pre SLUI demand of around 10,000 – 12,000. We had a target to produce 30,000 three meter poles annually by 2017, this was ambitious (without a large injection of capital and labour), current projections are around 17,800 poles
in 2017 and 29,900 in 2018. AnnexA With major planting projects being undertaken through SLUI, the nursery is also used as a trading account to buy in tree stock, sleeves for poles and chemicals for release spraying, and on charge to either landowners or our own plantings. These transactions are cost neutral. In this years budget we had predicted a slight profit from the trading of pine seedlings, this is unlikely to occur as we expect to break even on sales of around 150,000 seedlings. The aim of the nursery account is to break even. It is extremely difficult to run poplar and willow nurseries as a profitable enterprise and the nurseries we run lack the necessary size and infrastructure to be run on a fully commercial basis. The nursery budget for 2016-17 financial year covers the following three stand alone projects to allow each area’s performance to be monitored: . Trading of poles and sleeves with products purchased by Horizons and sold on to landowners. The purchasers are largely those involved in Environmental Grant or SLUI projects. This area should make a slight profit; . Growing poplar and willow poles in Horizons-owned and contracted nurseries. This includes costs to increase production in a number of nurseries in order to meet the growing demand for poles as a result of the SLUI. This area is usually expected to make a slight loss, last year it made a profit and may do so again this year; and . Trading pine and other tree species. The purchasers are largely those involved in Environmental Grant or SLUI projects. This area should break even. The main focus of this activity will be: . Operate nurseries to support erosion control programmes with sales of at least 12,500 poles. Supplement our own grown material with another 19,000-20,000 commercially grown poles. The overarching aim is to match pole supply with demand; . Continue to expand, upgrade and renew nursery stocks, within the existing budget, with the aim of producing 30,000 three metre poles from our own supplies by 2018. This will
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 92
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
require investment in infrastructure (water) to ensure pole growth and extra contracting costs which are included as Capex items. . Run to budget with the aim to break even (the nursery ran at a slight profit in both of the previous two financial years); and
. All saleable material sold (note our aim is to supply 3.0m poles to farmers, often we will 10 Item cut to waste slightly smaller material and a large amount of 1.0-1.5m stakes, we are endeavouring to find a market for this material and sell it at a rate which will at least offset the cost of cutting and disposing of it). Table 7: Summary of Expenditure (Nursery Forest Trading) Internal Hours Staff time 0
Table 8: Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue$ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Forestry trading 55,000 0 62,000 (7,000)
Table 9: Summary of Expenditure (Nursery Poplar Trading)
Internal Hours Staff time 0
Table 10: Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal AnnexA Revenue $ Rate Revenue$ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Poplar trading 260,250 0 275,725 (15,475)
Table 11: Summary of Expenditure (Nursery Management) Internal Hours Staff time 250
Table 12: Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal General Rate Revenue $ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Reserve Use Revenue$ Nursery 163,050 18,575 160,914 0 20,000 Management NB: *1 Reflects the net movement in stock capitalisation
Table 13: Summary of Expenditure (Nurseries) Internal Hours Staff time 250
Table 14: Expenditure Funded By Net rate Activity External Internal General Revenue $ Surplus / Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Reserve Use Deficit Nursery 478,300 18,575 498,639 0 (1,764) (combined) NB: *2 Reflects a forecast operating surplus of $1,764
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 93
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Note: as the nursery is a general rate funded activity any profits or surplus at year end is transferred to organisational general reserves. There is therefore no ability to build up reserves for years when losses may occur. However, the nature of a biological system relying on landowner demand for materials means there is a high chance that at various Item 10 Item times losses will occur due to disease, pests, drought and / or landowner incomes etc. These are all risks that may affect the slight profit the nursery is expected to generate this year.
AnnexA
Photo 3: Pole harvest Bulls nursery winter 2015 (photo John Jamieson)
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 94
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
3 Targets and Summary Expenditure
3.1 Summary Expenditure The Annual Plan 2016-17 indicates project group costs of $1,014,467. This expenditure is
shown by activity in the table below: 10 Item Table 15: Summary expenditure Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue$ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Regional and 8,300 227,299 235,599 Coast E-grants 80,000 80,000 Soil Health 25,600 39,620 65,220 Industry 80,170 56,603 136,773 Partnerships Nursery (combined) 478,300 18,575 498,639 (1,764) Total 672,370 342,097 498,639 515,828
3.2 Targets
Realistic targets are difficult to set for activities that are a mix of promotion, information, advice and assistance. The following Operational Plan targets have been set, with the Annual Plan targets highlighted in bold font: Table 16: Summary of Targets
Activity Targets AnnexA 1. Produce five Environmental Plans per year. 2. Manage Environmental Grant programme to carry out 50 projects or spend all the grant allocation ($80,000). 3. Target 150 ha of land improvement projects through Regional and Coast Environmental Grant assistance. 4. Manage the consent process for vegetation clearance within the Regional and Coastal zones; if consent is required it is to be produced within five working days. 1. Run two Soil Health workshops per year to inform and encourage sustainable use of soils within our region. 2. Produce two Soil Health plans per year to provide wider Soil Health appreciation of sustainable use of soils within our region. 3. Implement the SOE monitoring programme and report the results of previous monitoring. 1. Provide support for at least four Industry Partnership initiatives that will promote sustainable land use in our region. 2. Commit funding to the New Zealand Poplar and Willow Industry Partnerships Trust. 3. Commit funding and support to the Ballance Farm Environment Award programme within our region, resulting in award winner and winner field day. 1. Operate Council nursery and source additional commercial material to deliver 32,000 poles (poplar and willow) to erosion control programmes - Council target 12,500 poles - Commercial target 19,500 poles 2. Purchase and resell nursery material in support of land Nurseries management activities within the region. 3. Provide technical support to the New Zealand Poplar and Willow Trust. 4. Provide sites suitable for trial and bulking new poplar and willow clones as provided by the New Zealand Poplar & Willow rust.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 95
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
3.3 Environmental Grant – Regional and Coast
Funding of work programmes is provided through the Environmental Grant Programme (E- grant). The aim of the E-grant is to support and encourage work to be done on erodible land. In providing grant money Horizons can influence the work carried out in a number of
Item 10 Item ways: . At the base level the grant may provide the impetus to get some work done; . It may encourage farmers to do more or complete programmes at a faster rate; and . It may offer enough incentive to improve the technical quality of the work, through planting at appropriate spacing, use of better species, greater setbacks etc. In the past E-grant funding through the Land Team has supported a mix of works in a variety of landforms (biodiversity, water quality, erosion control on dairy, sheep and other farm types or land uses). Now the land E-grant is more specifically targeted at soil/land/erosion issues on farms or areas that do not figure in priority areas as outlined in the One Plan (Hill Country Erosion Zone/SLUI, WCS. Land E-grant projects carried out in 2015-16 included: . 47 project applications to land works, including 3 transferred to Freshwater and 1 each to SLUI, WCS and the government resilience package;
. 5 school dynex sleeve recycling projects
. 52 projects which, if all went ahead, would have required a grant allocation of $88,139; . 41 projects were completed, 36 E-grant and 5 schools . 41 projects resulted in 33,130 trees planted, 2,412 poles, 5.5 km of fencing and 118 ha
of work completed; and AnnexA . The final 41 projects had a grant cost of $47,624. . The area of land treated was well below the Annual Plan target (118 vs 150 ha), this reflects the difficulty of allocating areas to work programmes, there were less afforestation and retirement projects completed, these projects tend to give the greater aerial coverage. The Land E-grant projects for 2016-17 have the same grant allocation of $80,000 and the same broad targets as before. Management of the allocation of funds is always a delicate balance in order not to over-approve and have more funds requested than available, against the knowledge that because some jobs do not go ahead, there are savings in the budget for jobs that are approved. In order to spread the grant allocation as widely as possible there are a number of rules governing allocation: . The work types eligible for grant are limited and outlined in protocols; . The grant rate is to be up to 30%. In exceptional circumstances this can be exceeded but only with sign off of a senior officer; . The maximum grant allocation per project is $10,000; . Approved projects will be paid out on actual and reasonable grant cost up to, but not exceeding, the approved amount; . First priority for approval goes to projects with an environmental plan (this is to encourage long-term planning rather than one-off projects); and Currently (18 July 2016) there are 26 approved projects with a grant cost of $45,011.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 96
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
4 Reporting
4.1 Bi Monthly Item 10 Item Provide reports to the Catchment Operations Committee reporting of SLUI, Regional and Coast and Whanganui Catchment Strategy. These reports provide an update of the progress against the targets as agreed in this Operational Plan (or as presented in the Annual Plan) along with a general update on activities being undertaken and any new issues as they arise.
4.2 Annual Report
Reporting to Council: Report against targets as set out in the Annual Plan.
4.3 Community Plan
Report against Community and Annual Plan targets.
AnnexA
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 97
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexA
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 98
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
5 Appendices
5.1 Supporting Maps
Item 10 Item
AnnexA
Map 1: Land Management Zones
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 99
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
5.2 Environmental Grant Locations
Item 10 Item
AnnexA
Map 2: Location of environmental grants 2015-16.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 100
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
10 Item
SLUI Operational Plan 2016-17
AnnexB
July 2016
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 101
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
Endorsed by Council at the Catchment Operations meeting on xxx
Author Grant Cooper Manager - Land
Front Cover Photos Horizons Regional Council
AnnexB
July 2016 Report No: 2015/EXT/1486 ISBN: 978-1-927259-55-9
CONTACT 24 hr Freephone 0508 800 800 [email protected] www.horizons.govt.nz
Kairanga Cnr Rongotea and Levin Kairanga-Bunnythorpe 11 Bruce Road Roads Palmerston North Palmerston North 11-15 Victoria Avenue Taihape SERVICE REGIONAL DEPOTS Torere Road CENTRES HOUSES Marton Wanganui Ohotu Hammond Street 181 Guyton Street Woodville Taumarunui 116 Vogel Street 34 Maata Street
POSTAL Horizons Regional Council, Private Bag 11025, Manawatu Mail Centre, Palmerston North 4442 F 06 9522 929 ADDRESS
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 102
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
CONTENTS
1 SLUI Operational Overview and Background 5
1.1 Background 5 Item 10 Item 1.2 Land – Scope and Operational Overview 5 2 Annual Report 2015-16 7 2.1 Contract targets 7 3 Finance Overview 9 3.1 Introduction 9 3.2 The role of the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) and Hill Country Erosion Fund (HCEF) Contract 9 3.3 Funding policy 10 3.4 Shared costs 10 3.5 Four Year/Ten Year Budget 11 3.6 Legacy of June 2015 Flood Event 11 3.7 Operational and financial structure 12
4 Budgets 2016-17 and LTP 17 4.1 Budget Detail – Contract 3 (HCEF) 2015-19 and LTP 17 4.2 Operational budget overview 2015-19 (LTP) 17 4.3 Operational Budget and Contract Targets 2016-17 (Annual Plan) 19 4.4 Budget changes from 2015-16 to 2016-17 21 AnnexB 5 Progress on Issues change to section 5 and 5.1 23 6 Other non target and non financial work for 2016-17 change to 5.2 29 7 Summary 2015-16 Reporting 33
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 103
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexB
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 104
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
1 SLUI Operational Overview and Background
1.1 Background Item 10 Item
The aim of the Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI) is to reduce accelerated hill country erosion. While the emphasis will be on Top Priority and Highly Erodible Land, all land at risk of erosion will be eligible for assistance under this programme. Staff from Horizons Regional Council, with other agencies, will work with landowners to develop Whole Farm Plans (WFP) and Implementation Plans. These Plans together will provide the blueprint for long-term environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Research, publicity, education, information, incentives, joint ventures and land purchase (among a suite of other implementation tools) may be used to encourage the landowner/occupier to change to more sustainable farming practices. Government departments and ministries, Horizons Regional Council and district councils, Federated Farmers, Crown Research Institutes (CRI’s), Farm Forestry Association and farm consultants will work together to develop, manage, fund and implement this programme.
1.2 Land – Scope and Operational Overview
The issues of scope and operational overview have been outlined in previous Operational Plans and are unchanged from year to year. Land management and land use issues stem mainly from the effects of human activities on land. Any mismanagement of the land resource can have major implications for water quality and aquatic biodiversity in terms of sediment and nutrient inputs. These implications stem from the very strong links that exist between the land and water resources. AnnexB Agriculture, particularly pasture-based farming, is the foundation of the region’s economy. However, in some areas past and present agricultural practices are damaging the very resource upon which the agricultural sector is based – the land and soil. Future agricultural practices have the potential to increase the rate of damage if they do not take the natural limitations of the land into account. Operationally the Natural Resources and Partnership – Land Team (NRP – Land) has been charged with the responsibility of managing each of these planning and process stages in delivery of SLUI with various levels of support. . Oversight and Governance support – Council and SLUI Advisory Group . Prioritisation support – NRP Science . Engagement support – SLUI Advisory Group . Farm Planning support - private contractors . Implementation support – private contractors . Physical Works support – land owners . Monitoring and Audit support – NRP Science, Catchment Information & CRI’s . Reporting support – Corporate and Finance
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 105
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexB
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 106
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
2 Annual Report 2015-16
2.1 Contract targets Item 10 Item
25,000 ha of farm mapped - Achieved . 28,771 ha mapped 115% of target. . 37 plans mapped for the year, average farm size 761 ha. 17,500 ha of farm mapped to be in target areas - Achieved . 20,713 ha mapped in target areas, 118% of target. 2,500 ha of works - Achieved . 2,914 ha of works completed, 117% of target. . This was to include 800 ha of non retirement – 752 ha achieved. . 1,700 ha of retirement – 2,162 ha achieved. 24,000 poles established – Not Achieved
. Final figure of 22,482 ha.
. More poles were planted but they were to replace dead poles from previous seasons. . Around 2,475 poles were cancelled as a result of the 2015 storm event. Sediment reduction report – Achieved
. Completed by Landcare research in November 2015 and reported to Council. AnnexB . Report sent to Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) in March 2016. Advisory meetings - Achieved . Two Advisory Group meetings held against a target of two and minutes sent to MPI in January and May. Catchment Operations reports - Achieved . Five Catchment Operations Committee meetings held against a target of five, agendas sent to MPI. Case Study – Part Achieved . A draft case study on small scale irrigation has been received and forwarded to MPI. Shapefiles sent to MPI – Achieved . Final shapefiles for WFP boundaries and works sent to MPI 22 July. Milestone reports to MPI – Achieved . Final report due to MPI in mid July, will be actioned and final financial report after audit in August. Funding invoices and funding received - Achieved . Final invoice sent 30 June. Non Contract achievements . There was 395 individual claims submitted at an average grant of 39.55%. . The cost share of works has been $1,491,342, with a landowner input of $2,279,756. . Five SLUI scholarships awarded (May 2016) and 2 students employed over summer.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 107
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexB
Photo 1: Willows as stock feed, Tararua District (Photo Mair Owen)
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 108
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
3 Finance Overview
3.1 Introduction Item 10 Item
The early setting of the SLUI budgets were subject to a number of difficulties in attempting to estimate the cost of delivering the outcomes planned for in the SLUI initiative, whilst having no confirmed programme funding. Early estimates, (circa. January 2005) were based upon a series of assumptions, some of which were reasonable at that time, others were wildly optimistic. Factors such as; the level of Central Government funding, the level of rating, the amount of work which would be carried out were very rough estimates, whereas the cost of whole farm planning and the cost of works were based on experience of work completed in earlier programmes. Cost estimates prepared at that time assumed best case scenarios for funding and indicated the 10-year cost of SLUI would be $84,438,208, with Year 1 (2006–07) estimated to cost $1,550,575. The reality for those planning and implementing the SLUI programme is that the programme has to be affordable for all while also working within the budget constraints of its funding partners – Central Government, regional ratepayers and farmers. While most of the original costings in the concept budget of 2007 have proven to be robust, the reality of funding and funding changes over time has led to a number of budgetary and
operational variations. These changes caused the end point of the SLUI programme to be extended, and a flattening out of the cost increases proposed in response to the varying levels of input from partners (Horizons, Central Government and landowners). Throughout this time Central Government approvals and Council Long Term Plans (LTP)
rarely coincided. AnnexB
3.2 The role of the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) and Hill Country Erosion Fund (HCEF) Contract
Central Government funding has been delivered through contracts with the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI). A core fund of $2.2 M is available by application. This funding is referred to by MPI as the Sustainable Land Management Hill Country Erosion Programme. Currently there are six Regional Councils funded under this programme.
3.2.1 First HCEF Contract (2007 – 2010)
The original MPI contract in 2007 funded SLUI until December 2010 to a total level of $5.873 million (excl. GST). MPI undertook an internal review of this funding and the progress being made by SLUI in April 2010 (Hill Country Erosion Fund Performance Validation Report – April 2010, Brown, Dobbs, and Ramsden).
3.2.2 Second HCEF Contract (2010 – 2015)
A second application was made to the HCEF in May 2010. This application took into account recommendations from the Validation Report. The application was approved in July 2010 and the second contract was signed off in June 2011. This contract funded SLUI until June 2015 to a total level of $7.519 million (excl. GST). Two variations to this contract were approved by MPI (1011-15077 2013-14 and 1011-15077 2014-15). The 2013-14 variation added a one off $100,000 to the HCEF funding. These variations sought, and were granted to decrease the area of new farm plans per year, transfer dollars saved to more works, recognise the drop-off in work targets due to loss of the Afforestation Grant Scheme funding, and allow larger areas of afforestation to be joint funded by MPI/Horizons (i.e. raise the <5 ha forestry threshold up to 20 ha).
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 109
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
3.2.3 Third HCEF Contract (2015-2019) - current
A new funding round for the HCEF programme opened in December 2014, with an announcement expected by March 2015. The fund was heavily over-subscribed and MPI took longer than expected to finalise and announce the funding outcomes. As a
Item 10 Item consequence the uncertainty of HCEF funding cut across the Annual Plan (AP) and Long Term Plan (LTP) submissions and deliberations, and resulted in last minute reworks of budgets in order to “balance the books”. Horizons was successful in obtaining a further four years funding to a total value of $4.76 million. While this was over 50% of the overall national funding available, it was considerably less than the $6.8 million applied for. Annual funding from HCEF was confirmed for four more years as follows: . 2015-16 $1,331,602 . 2016-17 $1,190,000 . 2017-18 $1,149,889 . 2018-19 $1,088,509 . Total $4,760,000 These funds are not inflation-adjusted.
A re worked contract document was signed in February 2016 (Contract number 408649)
3.3 Funding policy
As the SLUI programme matured it was clear that when Horizons made its second AnnexB application for funding to MPI’s HCEF that the original intention to fund 1/3:1/3:1/3 (HRC:Government:Landowner) would not be possible. Based on the overall size of the programme and Horizons’ significant ratepayer funded contribution, the Government’s allocation or share of funding would be insufficient to meet this funding policy cost share. To ensure compliance with its funding policy, Horizons in its last LTP settled on a policy approach of a “UAC maximum”. Over the life of the LTP this UAC has been set at between $36-$42 (GST inclusive) resulting in an annual SLUI fund of between $3.58M and $3.79M (GST inclusive). This decision essentially caps the region’s cash contribution to SLUI at approximately $3.79M per annum. The policy now states that the Government contribution through the HCEF will be added to this UAC maximum and references to a funding split have been removed.
3.4 Shared costs
Allied with this funding policy decision was the influence that the introduction of the Afforestation Grant Scheme (AGS) had on the HCEF contract with Horizons. In response to the release of the AGS, the HCEF Contract was amended at that time to limit any Government funds from the HCEF going towards works programmes involving forestry over 5 ha (latterly relaxed to 20 ha). While the uptake of AGS by SLUI clients was impressive, there remained a number who didn’t wish to fund forestry from AGS (i.e. they wanted to keep their carbon) and instead were interested in using grants, subsidies and joint venture mechanisms operating within the SLUI programme. Horizons have overcome this issue by splitting its UAC allocation into two parts. The first and majority contribution this year of approximately $2.54M is targeted at a cost share arrangement with MPI. This jointly funded programme involved an agreed suite of works. The remaining proportion of the UAC ($0.96M) would fund SLUI works that MPI was unwilling to fund, such as leases in advance and major forestry grant projects.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 110
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
This funding split has been recognised in the ongoing budget summary and is shown as two parts; it has often been referred to as “above the line funding” (i.e. joint funded projects) and “below the line funding” (i.e. Joint Ventures (JVs) and afforestation of areas greater than 5 ha, from Horizons).
3.5 Four Year/Ten Year Budget 10 Item
This Operational Plan is developed in consideration of a four year HCEF contract and a 10 year LTP budget. The fact that the HCEF contract is not inflation adjusted and the constraints on the Horizons UAC maximum funding have been taken into account when setting targets. The current contract budget has been developed in conjunction with MPI. It splits the work and funding areas into eight sections (10.1 to 10.8). Total investment over this funding round is expected to be $4,760,000 HCEF and approximately $14,500,000 Horizons.
3.6 Legacy of June 2015 Flood Event
The Operational Plan for 2015-16 suggested there could be impacts from the June 2015 flood event. This was a significant storm event for the lower reaches of our western catchments. At the time the potential impacts were suggested to be:
. Early poles delivered to farmers for winter planting are lost and Horizons will not invoice farmers for these poles, with a potential cost to the Nursery budget. . Farmers unable to complete work programmes by the end of June, jobs can’t be claimed and will be put off until the 2015-16 year; at this stage about $53,000 of grant work is unclaimed because of this.
. Farmers won’t have access to their farms and will be unable to complete winter planting AnnexB programmes with the worst case affecting delivery of 6,000 poles. Horizons propose to fly poles and contract plant with the extra cost picked up by the grant programme, up to $30,000. . Farmers will have restricted discretionary expenditure as they are faced with clean-up costs, therefore work programmes may decline in the next couple of years. . Farmers previously reluctant to become involved in SLUI may rethink and Horizons may have increased demand for WFP; logically we could increase our WFP target for this year. . Some farmers may wish to advance their work programmes leading to increased demand for grant money. A summary of the issues and a proposal for allocation of free poles was presented to the Catchment Operations Committee in September 2015, “June 2015 Storm Response”. At that time the staff noted a number of issues: . Areas of severe landsliding corresponded with areas where 48 hour rainfalls exceeded 150mm . Considerable disruption was caused to the winter 2015 pole delivery and planting programme . Clients lost poles, cancelled or reduced orders and extra resources were required to plant poles at a total cost of around $27,000 . There was some increased pole demand and new or added orders resulting in extra “pole income” of $9,000. . A proposal was accepted by Council to fund a “free pole allocation” within a defined area with costs of $97,000 in 2015 and $26,000 in 2016. . Funding was approved out of the SLUI reserves as an overspend if required.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 111
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Subsequent to this report Council were offered and accepted additional funding from the MPI for rural communities to recover from the June 2015 event. This funding package of $150,000 was earmarked to use for leverage of resilience works within the same general area as the councils pole assistance programme (the area with the worst erosion damage).
Item 10 Item
3.7 Operational and financial structure
3.7.1 Whole Farm Plans (Finance Project codes WFP 101 – 106)
This budget area includes the responsibility to prepare the WFP, from initial marketing and discussions with the landowner through to the delivery and explanation of what is in the plan and what may be involved in the work programme. There are a number of processes staff need to follow in order to deliver a final quality product to the landowner in such a way that there is a high likelihood that the work programme will be implemented. Processes – pre-plan agreement and marketing: . Individual staff are assigned geographic areas with a list of potential WFP candidates. They are required to account for contacts made and progress in bringing new clients into the WFP process.
. Clients may be approached by Horizons or may approach us. If they meet the criteria for a WFP then they are taken to the next stage. As the number of WFP completed is now well over 600 both the targets and demand for plans is falling. Staff will now assess plans by potential to have target land. These will be given highest priority and other plans will be dropped down the list or put on hold until the following year.
AnnexB . Pre-plan marketing includes a visit to explain SLUI and the WFP process, this will include expectations about plan implementation and works. A handout sheet is available. . Once a landowner agrees to have a plan prepared they are sent out pre-plan information to fill out and return to Horizons. This includes a preliminary map of the farm, stock numbers, fertiliser information etc. Once this information is returned the file information is added to the WFP spreadsheet and allocated a contractor, and the marketing is completed.
Process – WFP production:
. With the pre-plan information returned by the landowner they are confirmed in the WFP spreadsheet which records details including farm, farmer, address, contacts including email, priority catchment, allocated officer and date passed on to contractor. The information is then passed on to the allocated contractor. . The contractor will arrange for time to carry out field work, which includes a meeting with the landowner and an offer to accompany on field work. . If possible during this process, those landowners undertaking the business assessment will also receive a visit from the contracted business consultant, and where possible the process of the WFP development and the business assessment will overlap. . The contractor supplies the plan in a written format to the agreed template and accompanying shapefiles, data and photographs to enter into Horizons’ systems. . The plan is received by staff for initial formatting including adding photos. If the business assessment is also complete this is added at this time; if not, the business assessment is completed as an appendix to the WFP and forwarded separately. The plan is sent for proofreading and once it is returned completed, a final version and copies are made. The plan is given an individual WFP number and an external document number is issued by document processing.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 112
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
. Shapefiles are entered into the SLUI database and at this stage we can confirm the area mapped and enter works programmes. . Two copies of the completed plan are presented to the staff Environmental Management Officer (EMO) who will then deliver the plan to the landowner and have initial discussions about its content and outline the recommendations that have been made. 10 Item This completes the work programme in bringing a WFP to “delivered” status. Budget costs are largely staff time and contractor costs and are relatively evenly spread throughout the year. There is always a surge to complete plans during May – July and both staff time and contractor cost peak over these months.
3.7.2 Implementation - Management and Support (Finance Project codes WFP 201- 207)
This budget area is where management of the SLUI programme is charged. Management Primarily Group Manager and Environmental Manager Land time to complete all reporting, liaison with funders, development of new partners, discussions with forestry companies, investors, carbon marketing. This time also includes approval of work plans and individual grant claims.
Contract Management and Legal Staff time to manage Horizons contracts with our subcontractors and any legal costs which arise from developing contracts with landowners (MOE, MOU, Joint Venture Forestry Rights etc).
Monitoring AnnexB Staff time, primarily based out of Regional House, to maintain information in the database: . Entering plan shapefiles and work programmes . Entering all grant claims, shapefiles for work completed . Assessing accuracy of mapping . Consistency of mapping across contractors and staff . Allocating priority zones (top, high, erodible and not erodible) . Assistance of Catchment Information Team to maintain database . Maintaining data and maps for all reporting (Council, MPI and others) . Providing shapefiles to MPI . Updating priority plan assessments . On-farm monitoring of progress and assessing suitability of work completed as an audit independent of field staff . Providing information internally and externally for SLUI progress assessments and reports. Marketing The major external cost is the provision of SLUI Scholarships (of up to $30,000). In this area we include the staff time to maintain and update the website, carry out any SLUI advertising, liaise with Massey University and generally promote the programme. Governance The cost to service the SLUI Advisory Group meetings. The aim is to run at least two meetings per year and potentially one of these meetings “on farm”. Some staff time to write reports, but mostly cost of running meetings and reimbursement for Members’ travel.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 113
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Technical Support and Science
A mix of internal and external costs. The internal costs are mostly related to staff time in developing long-term SLUI outcomes, and liaising with CRIs and our own science team to develop research needs. There are
Item 10 Item costs associated with extra sediment monitoring in priority catchments and subcatchments. The main area of external cost is any CRI reporting (eg LandCare SedNet reports) This also includes any technical costs associated with maintenance of the SLUI database or any other specialized hardware or software that may be required.
Training A small cost for staff time and external contractors for any SLUI-specific staff training. This may include geology training, attendance at LRI/LUC mapping courses, farm management courses, forestry courses and nutrient budgeting courses. Cost of all these projects are generally spread throughout the year.
3.7.3 Incentive and Works – Service Delivery (Labour) (Finance Project code WFP 301)
In this budget area staff convert the completed plan into an ongoing works programme, the
aim being to convert “delivered” plans to “being implemented”.
The majority of the cost involved is internal staff time and vehicle running, and there are five main areas of work: 1. Discussing and agreeing on the works programme for a new WFP. Usually this will involve at least one day’s work on-site and on-farm with the landowner. Invariably this
AnnexB will include an on farm inspection. (30 new plans x 20 hrs = 600 hrs). 2. Continuing liaison with existing WFP clients to oversee works programme, carry out inspections and claims for work completed, and agree and cost subsequent year’s programmes. This could involve 1-3 property visits per year. Assuming 85% of plans are active (540 plans x 18 hrs = 9,720 hrs). 3. Organise work programmes including afforestation and pole planting, oversee a small percentage of the major jobs and supervise and advise inexperienced operators or landowners (340 operations x 5 hrs and 5 operations x 100 hrs = 2,200 hrs). 4. Measure and monitor programmes (GIS measurement of tree blocks), manage Forestry Right blocks, liaise with other parties, communities, consultants and carry out on-farm trials and on-farm measurement (1,680 hrs). 5. Programme review and five year plan, this has been introduced this year in order to better plan and target on farm and region wide dollars and work programmes. This will be a significant workload, it has not been budgeted for in the LTP version of the SLUI programme. Some of the cost will be managed through reallocation of time from Whole Farm Plans (see 3.6.1), some will be undertaken under the normal client contacts (see points 1 and 2 above). Due to the time involved in this process staff have a cascade of priorities in carrying out these reviews starting with the oldest active plans first. Vehicle running costs in carrying out these operations will be a significant expense, estimated at $77,000 or 140,000km. These costs will be spread evenly throughout the year as staff have to manage work programmes around farming activities. Traditionally the quietest period for this work is December to February (weaning, shearing and holidays).
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 114
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
3.7.4 Incentives and Works (Non Retirement) (Finance Project codes WFP 401-404)
The grant share of funded programmes with landowners. The estimated cost and quantities of these various work types was developed in the 2009 SLUI Application and upgraded for the latest application. It is not easy to assess what works will come to charge, and when, in
a programme involving over 600 individual WFPs. MPI has given some latitude to date and 10 Item has tended to view our performance on the sum of the overall figures rather than each individual part. As noted these are non-retirement work types, where the landowners continue to use the land for pastoral farming. Space Planting - $282,691 This has been estimated in two parts; the mitigation package where poles are 100% and $25,000 has been allocated (1,000 poles, slightly higher per unit cost as there will be a proportion of access by helicopter). The remaining estimated grant cost for this work was calculated at an overall average grant of 50%, so the total cost of this work will be $515,000, which is the equivalent of approximately 24,000 poles and should treat approximately 660 ha. Gully planting - $65,000 This is the estimated grant cost for this work type and was calculated at an overall average grant of 50%, so the total cost of this work will be $130,000 which is the equivalent of approximately 6,500 poles. The area treated is very difficult to predict in gully control as
trees are planted closer than with space planting. Area treated approximately 60 ha.
Structures and Earthworks - $30,000 This is the estimated grant cost for this work and was calculated at an overall grant of 50%, so the total cost of this work will be $60,000. Work types include debris dams, drainage of earthflows, willow clearance etc. The aerial extent of this work is difficult to predict but has
been estimated at 100ha. AnnexB Other - $53,789 This is the estimated grant cost for this work and was calculated at an overall grant of 70%, so the total cost of this work will be $85,700. Work types include nursery pole establishment, alternative water supplies in retirement areas, pest control and consultancy to expand on new ideas. This work type does not lend itself to an aerial measurement.
3.7.5 Incentives and Works (Retirement) (Finance Project codes WFP 501-505)
This is the grant share of funded programmes with landowners. The estimated cost and quantities of these various work types was developed in the 2009 SLUI Application and upgraded for the latest application. It is not easy to assess what works will come to charge, and when, in a programme involving over 600 individual WFP. MPI has given some latitude to date and has tended to view Horizons performance on the sum of the overall figures rather than each individual part. As noted, these are retirement work types where the landowners will change the land use from pastoral farming. The eventual land use may be passive (retired) or include a variety of income streams (timber, honey, carbon, recreation, tourism) as long as they don’t conflict with the primary purpose of the grant payment, which is erosion control. Afforestation - $65,000 This is the estimated grant cost for this work type and was calculated at an overall average grant of 50%, so the total cost of this work will be $130,000, which is the equivalent of approximately 100 ha of plantings. Blocks can include bush and riparian areas and will occasionally include land planted but with no grant payment because it is not considered of high enough erosion potential. The 100 ha estimated is only for HCEF funded work, while other afforestation is completed under the Horizons-only fund as JV or large grant jobs.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 115
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Retirement - $270,000 This is the estimated grant cost for this work type and was calculated at an overall average grant of 60%, so the total cost of this work will be $450,000. The average cost of retirement
Item 10 Item work is very difficult to estimate at between $700 and $2,000 per ha; at $1,500 per ha this funding will treat approximately 300 ha of plantings. Often retirement is included in afforestation at no grant cost. Riparian - $683,000 This is the estimated grant cost for this work type and was calculated at an overall average grant of 60%, so the total cost of this work will be $1,138,333. The average cost of retirement work is approximately $2,625 per ha so this funding will treat approximately 430 ha of plantings. Often riparian retirement is included in afforestation at no grant cost. Riparian is a high cost work involving fences along streams with little land retired but target land treated. Managed Retirement - $35,516 This is the estimated grant cost for this work type and was calculated at a cost per ha rather than a grant rate. This is because MPI have agreed to a retirement guideline based between $100-$300 per ha. At 180 ha treated the average cost per ha is estimated to be
$197.
3.7.6 Incentives and Works (Horizons Funded)
In general this pool of funding has been set aside for work not accepted for funding share by MPI, specifically Joint Venture forestry and forests greater than 5 ha. Although there are no new JV proposals there are ongoing JV costs such as rates, maintenance of tracks and AnnexB fences, insurance, forest measurement and health. This year we need to budget for ongoing silviculture of our forests. New forests (grant expenditure >20 ha) $963,818 At this stage this nominally accounts for $300,000 JV lease $300,000 new JV forest (230ha) $363,818 grant assisted forest (660ha) This is the estimated grant cost for new grant assisted forest is at an overall average grant of 50%, so the total cost of this work will be $727,636. The average cost of afforestation is approximately $1,100 per ha so this funding will treat approximately 670 ha. Some allocation of hectares treated has also been made through assistance with AGS and Manuka plantations (80ha). Total estimated area 970ha
JV Afforestation (balance sheet transactions)
This is a new budget area set aside for ongoing JV costs such as rates, maintenance of tracks and fences, insurance, forest measurement and health and silviculture. JV cost (maintenance) $45,000 JV cost (silviculture) $157,247 JV cost ammortisation $124,000
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 116
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
Photo 2: Audit of SLUI works, mapping afforestation and bush retirement (Photo Natalie Hyslop)
AnnexB
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 117
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
4 Budgets 2016-17 and LTP
4.1 Budget Detail – Contract 3 (HCEF) 2015-19 and LTP Item 10 Item
The 2015-19 Operational Budget, as approved as part of the LTP, is summarised in Table 3. This budget will vary from the Operational Budget approved in the 2016-17 Annual Plan. The AP budget reallocated expenditure as a result of less WFP being completed and the WFP contracted tender price being slightly lower than budgeted.
4.2 Operational budget overview 2015-19 (LTP)
Table 1: Overview of SLUI Operational Budget (as approved in LTP and contract to MPI) SLUI Budget (Joint Funded - HCEF / HRC) Job Actual Actual Long Term Plan and HCEF Contract Project Group Description Total Number 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 10.1 Whole Farm Plans Internal Labour (WFP production) WFP101 $260,169 $237,611 $183,000 $180,000 $126,086 $138,270 $986,866 Internal Labour (WFP sales & marketing) WFP102 $30,611 $66,682 $192,543 $157,384 $150,000 $150,000 $597,220 Internal WFP Field Work WFP103 $24,325 $5,166 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $125,491
External (Contractor) Field Work WFP104 $529,755 $418,991 $310,000 $310,000 $290,000 $290,000 $1,858,746 External WFP Financial Analysis WFP105 $78,931 $40,016 $62,000 $60,000 $40,000 $40,000 $280,947 WFP production & other expenses WFP106 $19,776 $20,097 $10,904 $10,904 $10,000 $10,000 $71,681 Sub Total WFPs $943,567 $788,563 $790,447 $750,288 $648,086 $660,270 $3,920,951 10.2 Implementation Management WFP201 $128,069 $136,809 $132,000 $132,000 $132,000 $146,929 $660,878
Contract Management & Legal WFP202 $8,675 $7,333 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $38,508 AnnexB Monitoring (incl auditing) WFP203 $155,316 $218,915 $241,142 $236,035 $246,062 $250,000 $1,097,470 Marketing WFP204 $22,758 $32,408 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $160,166 Governance WFP205 $8,265 $11,276 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $42,041 Technical Support & Science WFP206 $8,197 $5,914 $47,980 $47,980 $47,980 $47,980 $158,051 Training WFP207 $13,829 $22,784 $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 $74,113 Sub Total Implementation & Management $345,109 $435,439 $483,622 $478,515 $488,542 $507,409 $2,231,227 10.3 Incentives & Works (Labour) Service delivery Internal WFP301 $1,050,071 $1,091,700 $1,173,164 $1,169,029 $1,212,918 $1,230,541 $5,696,882 Sub Total Non Incentives & Works (Labour) $1,050,071 $1,091,700 $1,173,164 $1,169,029 $1,212,918 $1,230,541 $5,696,882 10.4 Incentives & Works (Non Retirement Programmes) Space Plantings WFP401 $96,449 $130,084 $192,000 $198,789 $198,789 $210,000 $816,111 Gully Planting WFP402 $26,940 $41,674 $45,943 $60,000 $60,000 $69,000 $234,557 Structures WFP403 $10,823 $3,132 $25,000 $25,000 $20,000 $25,000 $83,955 Others WFP404 $3,487 $29,383 $20,000 $20,000 $13,802 $20,000 $86,672 Sub Total Incentives (Non Retirement) $137,699 $204,273 $282,943 $303,789 $292,591 $324,000 $1,221,295 10.5 Incentives & Works (Retirement & Land Use Change Programmes) Afforestation less than 5ha WFP501 $23,755 $29,776 $63,048 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $266,579 Retirement / Regeneration WFP503 $275,003 $165,329 $270,000 $270,000 $290,000 $310,000 $1,270,332 Riparian Programmes WFP504 $790,622 $799,336 $630,000 $670,000 $690,792 $718,508 $3,580,750 Managed retirement WFP505 $4,071 $30,918 $10,000 $13,604 $15,000 $15,000 $73,593 Sub Total Incentives & Works (Retirement) $1,093,451 $1,025,359 $973,048 $1,028,604 $1,070,792 $1,118,508 $5,191,254
TOTAL JOINT OPERATIONAL EXPENSES $3,569,897 $3,545,334 $3,703,224 $3,730,225 $3,712,929 $3,840,728 $18,261,609 10.6 Funded By (Income) HCEF (as Contracted) $1,543,000 $1,665,000 $1,331,602 $1,190,000 $1,149,889 $1,088,509 $7,968,000 HRC (Targeted rate) $2,026,897 $1,880,334 $2,373,224 $2,540,225 $2,563,040 $2,600,000 $11,383,720 TOTAL JOINT OPERATIONAL INCOME $3,569,897 $3,545,334 $3,704,826 $3,730,225 $3,712,929 $3,688,509 $19,351,720 SLUI (Forestry & Major Investment) (Non HCEF funded work) Job Actual Actual Long Term Plan and HCEF Contract Project Group Description Total Number 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 10.7 Incentives & Works (HRC Funded Programmes) - Afforestation Repayment $175,000 $350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $525,000 Ammortisation $124,557 Managed retirement (Compensation) MR**** $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Over 5 ha forests $66,078 $65,049 $454,882 $963,813 $834,732 $855,600 $3,240,154 Forestry Rights (Management) $64,438 Forestry Rights (Silvaculture) $204,495 Forestry Rights (Expenses - new forests) JV**** $473,482 $211,008 $0 $0 $0 $0 $684,490 RegionalForestry Rights Coast (Compensation & Land - leases) Operational Plan 2016JV**** -17$399,958 $0 $0 $0 $0 Page$0 118 $399,958 Sub Total (HRC Funded Retirement) $1,114,518 $1,019,547 $454,882 $963,813 $834,732 $855,600 $4,849,602 10.8 JV Afforestation (trs to Balance Sheet) Repayment $350,000 $175,000 $0 $0 $0 $525,000 Ammortisation $124,557 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $496,557 Forestry Rights (Expenses - Silviculture) $204,495 $315,515 $163,414 $211,167 $250,000 $894,591 Forestry Rights (Expenses - maintenance) $64,438 $34,488 $38,833 $39,905 $41,050 $177,664 AGS Forestry (Compensation & Grants) AG**** $0 Sub Total (HRC Funded Retirement) $0 $743,490 $649,003 $326,247 $375,072 $415,050 $6,943,414
TOTAL EXPENSES (HRC Funded) $1,114,518 $1,763,037 $1,103,885 $1,290,060 $1,209,804 $1,270,650 $4,849,602
TOTAL PROGRAMME COST (Joint plus HRC) $4,684,415 $5,308,371 $4,807,109 $5,020,285 $4,922,733 $5,111,378 $23,111,211 10.9 Funded By (Income) HRC (Targeted Rates) $1,114,518 $1,639,037 $979,885 $1,166,060 $1,085,804 $1,146,650 $4,353,602 HRC (Reserves) $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $496,000 TOTAL OPERATIONAL INCOME $1,114,518 $1,763,037 $1,103,885 $1,290,060 $1,209,804 $1,270,650 $4,849,602 Job Actual Actual Long Term Plan and HCEF Contract Project Group Description Total Number 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Farmer Contribution
Cash (farmer share of incentives) $1,241,000 $2,661,097 $1,300,000 $1,350,000 $1,350,000 $1,500,000 $9,402,097 In Kind (estimated) $522,000 $587,000 $530,000 $530,000 $520,000 $500,000 $3,189,000 Total $1,763,000 $3,248,097 $1,830,000 $1,880,000 $1,870,000 $2,000,000 $12,591,097 SLUI Budget (Joint Funded - HCEF / HRC) Job Actual Actual Long Term Plan and HCEF Contract Project Group Description Total Number 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 10.1 Whole Farm Plans Internal Labour (WFP production) WFP101 $260,169 $237,611 $183,000 $180,000 $126,086 $138,270 $986,866 Internal Labour (WFP sales & marketing) WFP102 $30,611 $66,682 $192,543 $157,384 $150,000 $150,000 $597,220 Internal WFP Field Work WFP103 $24,325 $5,166 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $125,491 External (Contractor) Field Work WFP104 $529,755 $418,991 $310,000 $310,000 $290,000 $290,000 $1,858,746 External WFP Financial Analysis WFP105 $78,931 $40,016 $62,000 $60,000 $40,000 $40,000 $280,947 WFP production & other expenses WFP106 $19,776 $20,097 $10,904 $10,904 $10,000 $10,000 $71,681 Sub Total WFPs $943,567 $788,563 $790,447 $750,288 $648,086 $660,270 $3,920,951 10.2 Implementation Management WFP201 $128,069 $136,809 $132,000 $132,000 $132,000 $146,929 $660,878 Contract Management & Legal WFP202 $8,675 $7,333 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $38,508 Monitoring (incl auditing) WFP203 $155,316 $218,915 $241,142 $236,035 $246,062 $250,000 $1,097,470 Marketing WFP204 $22,758 $32,408 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $160,166 Governance WFP205 $8,265 $11,276 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $42,041 Technical Support & Science WFP206 $8,197 $5,914 $47,980 $47,980 $47,980 $47,980 $158,051 Training WFP207 $13,829 $22,784 $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 $74,113 Sub Total Implementation & Management $345,109 $435,439 $483,622 $478,515 $488,542 $507,409 $2,231,227 10.3 Incentives & Works (Labour) Service delivery Internal WFP301 $1,050,071 $1,091,700 $1,173,164 $1,169,029 $1,212,918 $1,230,541 $5,696,882 Sub Total Non Incentives & Works (Labour) $1,050,071 $1,091,700 $1,173,164 $1,169,029 $1,212,918 $1,230,541 $5,696,882 10.4 Incentives & Works (Non Retirement Programmes) Space Plantings WFP401 $96,449 $130,084 $192,000 $198,789 $198,789 $210,000 $816,111 Gully Planting WFP402 $26,940 $41,674 $45,943 $60,000 $60,000 $69,000 $234,557 Structures WFP403 $10,823 $3,132 $25,000 $25,000 $20,000 $25,000 $83,955 Others WFP404 $3,487 $29,383 $20,000 $20,000 $13,802 $20,000 $86,672 Sub Total Incentives (Non Retirement) $137,699 $204,273 $282,943 $303,789 $292,591 $324,000 $1,221,295 10.5 Incentives & Works (Retirement & Land Use Change Programmes) Afforestation less than 5ha WFP501 $23,755 $29,776 $63,048 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $266,579 Retirement / Regeneration WFP503 $275,003 $165,329 $270,000 $270,000 $290,000 $310,000 $1,270,332 Riparian Programmes WFP504 $790,622 $799,336 $630,000 $670,000 $690,792 $718,508 $3,580,750 Managed retirement WFP505 $4,071 $30,918 $10,000 $13,604 $15,000 $15,000 $73,593 Sub Total Incentives & Works (Retirement) $1,093,451 $1,025,359 $973,048 $1,028,604 $1,070,792 $1,118,508 $5,191,254
TOTAL JOINT OPERATIONAL EXPENSES $3,569,897 $3,545,334 $3,703,224 $3,730,225 $3,712,929 $3,840,728 $18,261,609 Catchment10.6 Funded By Operations (Income) Committee 10HCEF August (as Contracted) 2016 $1,543,000 $1,665,000 $1,331,602 $1,190,000 $1,149,889 $1,088,509 $7,968,000 HRC (Targeted rate) $2,026,897 $1,880,334 $2,373,224 $2,540,225 $2,563,040 $2,600,000 $11,383,720 TOTAL JOINT OPERATIONAL INCOME $3,569,897 $3,545,334 $3,704,826 $3,730,225 $3,712,929 $3,688,509 $19,351,720
SLUI (Forestry & Major Investment) (Non HCEF funded work) Job Actual Actual Long Term Plan and HCEF Contract Project Group Description Total Number 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 10.7 Incentives & Works (HRC Funded Programmes) - Afforestation Repayment $175,000 $350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $525,000
Ammortisation $124,557 Item 10 Item Managed retirement (Compensation) MR**** $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Over 5 ha forests $66,078 $65,049 $454,882 $963,813 $834,732 $855,600 $3,240,154 Forestry Rights (Management) $64,438 Forestry Rights (Silvaculture) $204,495 Forestry Rights (Expenses - new forests) JV**** $473,482 $211,008 $0 $0 $0 $0 $684,490 Forestry Rights (Compensation - leases) JV**** $399,958 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $399,958 Sub Total (HRC Funded Retirement) $1,114,518 $1,019,547 $454,882 $963,813 $834,732 $855,600 $4,849,602 10.8 JV Afforestation (trs to Balance Sheet) Repayment $350,000 $175,000 $0 $0 $0 $525,000 Ammortisation $124,557 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $496,557 Forestry Rights (Expenses - Silviculture) $204,495 $315,515 $163,414 $211,167 $250,000 $894,591 Forestry Rights (Expenses - maintenance) $64,438 $34,488 $38,833 $39,905 $41,050 $177,664 AGS Forestry (Compensation & Grants) AG**** $0 Sub Total (HRC Funded Retirement) $0 $743,490 $649,003 $326,247 $375,072 $415,050 $6,943,414
TOTAL EXPENSES (HRC Funded) $1,114,518 $1,763,037 $1,103,885 $1,290,060 $1,209,804 $1,270,650 $4,849,602
TOTAL PROGRAMME COST (Joint plus HRC) $4,684,415 $5,308,371 $4,807,109 $5,020,285 $4,922,733 $5,111,378 $23,111,211 10.9 Funded By (Income) HRC (Targeted Rates) $1,114,518 $1,639,037 $979,885 $1,166,060 $1,085,804 $1,146,650 $4,353,602 HRC (Reserves) $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $496,000
TOTAL OPERATIONAL INCOME $1,114,518 $1,763,037 $1,103,885 $1,290,060 $1,209,804 $1,270,650 $4,849,602 Job Actual Actual Long Term Plan and HCEF Contract Project Group Description Total Number 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Farmer Contribution
Cash (farmer share of incentives) $1,241,000 $2,661,097 $1,300,000 $1,350,000 $1,350,000 $1,500,000 $9,402,097 In Kind (estimated) $3,189,000 $522,000 $587,000 $530,000 $530,000 $520,000 $500,000 AnnexB Total $1,763,000 $3,248,097 $1,830,000 $1,880,000 $1,870,000 $2,000,000 $12,591,097
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 119
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
4.3 Operational Budget and Contract Targets 2016-17 (Annual Plan)
The 2016-17 budget is shown in red along with the Contracted and Internal operational targets.
Table 2: SLUI Operational Budget and Targets Item 10 Item SLUI (Joint Funded programme) Financial Year Project Group Description 2016/17 AP Total 2015/16 2016/17 LTP 2017/18 2018/19 revised 10.1 Whole Farm Plans Internal Labour (WFP production) WFP101 $183,000 $180,000 $151,252 $126,086 $138,270 $640,338 Internal Labour (WFP sales & marketing) WFP102 $192,543 $157,384 $150,795 $150,000 $150,000 $650,722 Internal WFP Field Work WFP103 $32,000 $32,000 $34,950 $32,000 $32,000 $130,950 External (Contractor) Field Work WFP104 $310,000 $310,000 $200,000 $290,000 $290,000 $1,110,000 External WFP Financial Analysis WFP105 $62,000 $60,000 $55,610 $40,000 $40,000 $217,610 WFP production & other expenses WFP106 $10,904 $10,904 $10,800 $10,000 $10,000 $42,608 Sub Total WFPs $790,447 $750,288 $603,407 $648,086 $660,270 $2,792,228
Contract Target 2016/17 20,000 ha 14,000 ha to be in priority catchments internal targets maintain WFP database with no more than 4 month wait list for WFP continue to recruit landowners into programme in order to meet 20,000 ha target 85% of WFP are "being implemented" 90% of previous years plans are "being implemented or agreed" by the December following 50 % of WFP agree to undertake a business assessment bi monthly reports to Catchment Operations Committee
produce all WFP to agreed template and to format (professional document production)
internal cost labour $301,997 internal cost vehicles $26,000 external cost $275,410 total cost $603,407 10.2 Implementation Management WFP201 $132,000 $132,000 $156,450 $132,000 $146,929 $552,450
Contract Management & Legal WFP202 $7,500 $7,500 $6,500 $7,500 $7,500 $29,000 AnnexB Monitoring (incl auditing) WFP203 $241,142 $236,035 $232,061 $246,062 $250,000 $955,300 Marketing WFP204 $35,000 $35,000 $31,844 $35,000 $35,000 $136,844 Governance WFP205 $7,500 $7,500 $9,500 $7,500 $7,500 $32,000 Technical Support & Science WFP206 $47,980 $47,980 $36,185 $47,980 $47,980 $180,125 Training WFP207 $12,500 $12,500 $11,500 $12,500 $12,500 $49,000 Sub Total Implementation & Management $483,622 $478,515 $484,040 $488,542 $507,409 $1,934,719
Contract targets 2016/17 provide scholarships up to the value of $30,000 per year provide attendance for MPI at Catchment Operations meeting provide attendance for MPI at SLUI Advisory Group meetings report to MPI in Nov., Feb., Mar., and Annual Report SLUI case study engagement survey operational plan internal targets provide holiday work for students with first call to scholarship recipients run a minimum of two Advisory Group meetings monitor and report on progress with SLUI implementation including ways to report SLUI outcomes maintain accurate and up to date database reconcile SLUI work database with Ozone financial database monthly maintain a priority plan assessment and report on landowner priority uptake internal cost labour $381,796 internal cost vehicles and hydrology $15,500 external cost $86,744 total cost $484,040 10.3 Incentives & Works (Labour) Service delivery Internal WFP301 $1,173,164 $1,169,029 $1,212,202 $1,212,918 $1,230,541 $4,767,313 Sub Total Non Incentives & Works (Labour) $1,173,164 $1,169,029 $1,212,202 $1,212,918 $1,230,541 $4,767,313
Contract targets 2016/17 no specific contract targets, this work relates to achieving incentive targets internal targets maintain contact with WFP landowners, at least one contact per year manage grant process to internal guidelines complete claims in full and on time record claims in database with both financial and spatial recording of works and types manage supply of planting materials to enable work programmes to proceed oversee work programmes where appropriate internal cost labour $1,094,202 internal cost vehicles $77,000 external cost $41,000 total cost $1,212,202
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 120
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
10.4 Incentives & Works (Non Retirement Programmes) Space Plantings WFP401 $192,000 $198,789 $282,691 $198,789 $210,000 $872,269 Gully Planting WFP402 $45,943 $60,000 $65,000 $60,000 $69,000 $230,943 Structures WFP403 $25,000 $25,000 $30,000 $20,000 $25,000 $100,000 Others WFP404 $20,000 $20,000 $60,000 $13,802 $20,000 $113,802 Sub Total Incentives (Non Retirement) $282,943 $303,789 $437,691 $292,591 $324,000 $1,317,014
Contract targets 2016/17 26,000 poles established 720 ha of pole work 10 Item 820 ha 100 ha of other work internal cost labour $0 internal cost vehicles $0 external cost $437,691 total cost $437,691 10.5 Incentives & Works (Retirement & Land Use Change Programmes) Afforestation less than 5ha WFP501 $63,048 $75,000 $65,000 $75,000 $75,000 $278,048 Retirement / Regeneration WFP503 $270,000 $270,000 $270,000 $290,000 $310,000 $1,100,000 Riparian Programmes WFP504 $630,000 $670,000 $683,000 $690,792 $718,508 $2,673,792 Managed retirement WFP505 $10,000 $13,604 $35,516 $15,000 $15,000 $74,120 Sub Total Incentives & Works (Retirement) $973,048 $1,028,604 $1,053,516 $1,070,792 $1,118,508 $4,125,960
Contract targets 2016/17 1010 ha afforestation * * note afforestation targets include 300 ha retirement 1980 Horizons only works 430 ha riparian retirement 180 ha managed retirement no grants to be used where other funding is more appropriate any income derived from carbon credits generated from work carried out from using grant income is to be reinvested into internal cost labour $0 internal cost vehicles $0 external cost $1,053,516 total cost $1,053,516
TOTAL JOINT OPERATIONAL EXPENSES $3,703,224 $3,730,225 $3,790,856 $3,712,929 $3,840,728 $14,937,234 10.6 Funded By (Income) HCEF (as Contracted) $1,331,602 $1,190,000 $1,190,000 $1,149,889 $1,088,509 $5,950,000 HRC (Targeted rate) $2,373,224 $2,540,225 $2,540,225 $2,563,040 $2,600,000 $10,016,714
TOTAL JOINT OPERATIONAL INCOME $3,704,826 $3,730,225 $3,730,225 $3,712,929 $3,688,509 $15,966,714 AnnexB SLUI (Forestry & Major Investment) (Non HCEF funded work) Financial Year Project Group Description Total 2015/16 2016/17 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 10.7 Incentives & Works (HRC Funded Programmes) - Afforestation Repayment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Managed retirement (Compensation) MR**** $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Over 5 ha forests $454,882 $963,813 $363,818 $834,732 $855,600 $3,472,845 Forestry Rights (Silvaculture) Forestry Rights (Expenses) JV**** $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $300,000 Forestry Rights (Compensation) JV**** $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $300,000 Sub Total (HRC Funded Retirement) $454,882 $963,813 $963,818 $834,732 $855,600 $4,072,845 10.8 JV Afforestation (trs to Balance Sheet) Repayment $175,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $175,000 Ammortisation $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $496,000 Forestry Rights (Expenses - Silviculture) $315,515 $163,414 $157,247 $211,167 $250,000 $847,343 Forestry Rights (Expenses - maintenance) $34,488 $38,833 $45,000 $39,905 $41,050 $158,226 AGS Forestry (Compensation & Grants) AG**** $0 Sub Total (HRC Funded Retirement) $649,003 $326,247 $326,247 $375,072 $415,050 $5,749,414
internal targets maintain JV forests to meet contract and budget expectations meet any ETS and carbon commitments that may arise maintain lease and balance sheet transfers fund afforestation "HRC alone" to meet contracted targets internal cost labour $0 internal cost vehicles $0 external cost $1,290,060 total cost $1,290,060
TOTAL HRC ONLY OPERATIONAL EXPENSES $1,103,885 $1,290,060 $1,290,065 $1,209,804 $1,270,650 $4,072,845 10.9 Funded By (Income) HRC (Targeted Rates) $979,885 $1,166,060 $1,166,060 $1,085,804 $1,146,650 $4,267,545 HRC (balance sheet) $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $124,000 $496,000 TOTAL HRC ONLY OPERATIONAL INCOME $1,103,885 $1,290,060 $1,290,060 $1,209,804 $1,270,650 $4,763,545 TOTAL PROGRAMME COST (HCEF + HRC) $4,807,109 $5,020,285 $5,080,921 $4,922,733 $5,111,378 $19,010,079
Farmer Contribution Financial Year Project Group Description Total 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Cash (farmer share of incentives) $1,600,000 $1,350,000 $2,982,414 $1,350,000 $1,350,000 $7,282,414 In Kind (estimated) $400,000 $530,000 $500,000 $520,000 $520,000 $1,950,000 Total $2,000,000 $1,880,000 $3,482,414 $1,870,000 $1,870,000 $9,232,414
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 121
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
4.4 Budget changes from 2015-16 to 2016-17
There have been changes to the 2016-17 operational budget based on three main factors: 1. Confirmation of MPI contract budget and targets.
Item 10 Item 2. Reflection of a desire to spend less on plans and more on works. 3. Further savings in WFP cost as a result of new tender for contracts (December 15). These savings have been directed toward implementing the works programme. In comparing 2015-16 to 2016-17 the main variations will be: . Whole Farm Plan (10.1) decreases by $146,881 as the average per ha rate drops for farm plans. Staff time has also been reduced as the cost of WFP production reduces with less plans. There could be greater savings in internal labour from less sales and marketing cost. . Implementation (10.2) increases by $5,525; savings from less scholarship spend and less technical support are offset by increased management cost as reporting time increases, case studies, and a ten year review including consultant costs. . Incentives and Works (10.3) increases by $43,173 as staff spend more time visiting more farmers implementing and reviewing work programmes. . Non-Retirement Programmes (10.4) increases by $133,902 as we grow the number of poles available for planting. This is redirection of savings from 10.1. . Retirement Programmes (10.5) increases by $25,012. This will be for works joint funded with MPI. . Both work programmes increase slightly reflecting an increase in work targets from
2,500 ha to 2,800 ha. AnnexB . Horizons- Funded programmes (10.7) unchanged overall, reflecting funds put aside for forestry over 5ha or any JV forestry costs should they be required. . JV Afforestation (10.8) unchanged overall. This is budget line reflects spending on our FR/JV forests. . Note, the Total Joint Operational Expenses has increased from $3.730 M to $3.790 M. This is not balanced by income of $3.730 M. This is partially offset by the approved overspend from SLUI June 2015 Storm commitments. If the budget is still overspent there will need to be a slight draw down of SLUI reserves.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 122
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
5 Progress on Issues
In this section the issues identified over previous Operational Plans are reassessed. Any outstanding issues that staff feel still need to be resolved will be highlighted and discussed further. This will include issues highlighted in Council workshops in August 2013, June
2015, November 2015 and February 2016. 10 Item . How do we identify priority land; are the current definitions appropriate? The original One Plan definition used Highly Erodible Land (HEL) and this has been changed to Erosion Potential Land (EPL). Internally, the SLUI team has developed categories of non erodible, erodible, high priority and top priority land: Work has been carried out to simplify and clarify the definitions. A report has been completed and this is reflected in the Catchment Operations report where the maps presented have been changed. A paper was also presented to Council on “Prioritisation and implementation of SLUI”. Progress in 2015-16 - The February 2016 council workshop built on this further. A number of new graphs were presented which have now been included in the bi monthly Catchment Operations Report. In the report Graph 2 has been enhanced to include land erodibility class and a new graph (Graph 3) has been introduced
identifying works carried out by land erodibility class.
The February 2016 workshop also presented the following; “At this stage we can only estimate (based on SedNet and our very experienced gut feel) the amount of sediment reduction but we believe that; - 63% of the sediment reduction achieved to date has been from works on
Top priority land that was in pasture AnnexB
- 20% was from Top priority land that was in trees
- 13% was from Highly erodible land that was in pasture.
Looking at this by work type; - 55% of the sediment reduction has been achieved through afforestation
- 18% was from bush retirement
- 16% was from riparian retirement
- 10% was from space and gully planted poles”.
. What is the correct mix of SLUI expenditure on farm; should it be targeted at retaining the productive base of the land or on prevention of sediment entering watercourses? This was taken back to the SLUI Advisory Group and the recommitment to the SLUI grant guidelines places the emphasis on works which will prevent sediment entering watercourses. Progress in 2015-16 - This was also discussed at the February 2016 workshop, with the general feeling that the emphasis remained about right. . Is the balance correct in terms of the number of WFPs we are doing? If we feel we are doing too many farm plans can we do fewer and move the money saved into implementation? This has contract implications: This has been completed, contract variation approved and request for further change this year.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 123
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Issues for 2015-16 – this has been partially addressed in the new Annual Plan
and potential MPI contract, with the plan targets to steadily decline with funding saved going into works programmes. There is a wider discussion still to be resolved around whether there should be a cost (in part or full) to landowners for the WFP.
Item 10 Item Progress for 2015-16 - Charging for WFP – this has been discussed at the SLUI Advisory Group meeting of October 2015, at two Council workshops and at two Catchment Operations Committee meetings. The resolution is not to charge at this stage but this can be reassessed in future Annual Plan processes. . Should we change the criteria within which we offer business assessments? What is it costing, are they useful to landowners and to implementation? If we change, what to? This has not been completed. Business assessments currently are requested by approximately 50% of those taking up a WFP. The cost last year was about 8% of the WFP cost and about 1.5% of the overall SLUI expenditure. There is some interest about “farm optimisation”, and if this is to proceed it helps if the farm has undertaken a business assessment and there are Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to compare farm to farm. Issues for 2015-16 – although this issue has not been raised, this fits into the overall cost and charging for the WFP. Progress for 2015-16 - This has not been discussed in any detail over 2015-16. Farmers are generally declining the offer of a business assessment and at this stage it is not an issue. . Given an expected decline in forestry plantings with changes to the ETS and loss of AGS, should we offer our own version of AGS to SLUI customers? (This would be
another tool to grant rates and JVs). What would be likely costs, risks, rewards? AnnexB No clarification on this. Once the LTP and new contract are clearer there would be more point in discussing opportunities in this area. The funding for this work is likely to come from the Horizons alone part of the SLUI budget. Some initial work has been done, taking the lead from the MPI review of the East Coast Forestry Project and the grant rates offered for various afforestation projects. Issues for 2015-16 – an AGS has been reintroduced starting winter 2016. This will complement the SLUI programme but there is no guarantee applications from our region will be successful. There is still an issue around how Horizons can get best leverage from AGS, HCEF and its own pool of funding available for retirement and afforestation type works. No progress in 2015-16 – the comments made above still apply. . Is it reasonable to have a contract condition limiting MPI funding for afforestation to blocks of less than 5 ha? This was to encourage funding through the AGS, which no longer exists: Actioned in contract variation and some relaxation of this condition. Issues for 2015-16 – this may become an issue again, and much will depend on how the new MPI contract is negotiated and what limits MPI may wish to impose. No progress in 2015-16 – a per ha limit has been reintroduced in line with the new AGS, needs to be discussed with MPI. . Should we investigate the possibility of a second rotation JV agreement with landowners? What would the benefits be to SLUI or is this an investment decision? No progress. Issues for 2015-16 – no progress. Progress for 2015 -16 – not a concern at this stage.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 124
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
. What are the outcomes and learnings to put in place from the SLUI questionnaire and are there issues picked up from the questionnaire that need to be addressed? No action. Issues for 2015-16 – there were some questions asked in the SLUI questionnaire
that have some relevance in current SLUI queries (willingness to pay for WFPs, 10 Item satisfaction, advice supplied, economic value of plan). This information will be used where applicable. Progress for 2015-16 – no progress, none needed. . External progress report. No action but hope to link outcomes from the AgResearch report into the SLUI outcomes. Issues for 2015-16 – none. Progress in 2015-16 – a SLUI survey has been contracted through Ministry for the Environment, AgResearch and Horizons with a report due in October 2016. The outcomes of this report will form the basis of the SLUI review as part of the MPI contract. . Over-allocation of grant funds and a process for managing expectations. An allocation process has been put into place with staff and staff must manage expectations with their SLUI clients. They are reporting some frustration with a small number of landowners where works are being delayed and they are noting that as new plans come on board work programmes will begin later. This year we will investigate a pre-approval process for larger cost works. Issues for 2015-16 – continue with the allocation process. This worked reasonably well in 2014-15, however it could be argued management were too AnnexB conservative in allocating funding to staff and there was an underspend in the works programme in 2014-15. Progress for 2015-16 – this process has worked well, it now includes a large grant allocation process where grants over $20,000 are referred to a panel for approval. This aids staff and client in giving clarity and approval of funding. Progress for 2016-17 – consider a paper to council requesting an over-allocation of grant funds recognising that in any year all allocated grant funds are not typically spent. . Clarify the process for bringing JV/FR programmes to Council. There are no JV/FR programmes planned for this year and although these can come forward at any time, realistically there would be nothing until winter 2016 at the earliest. Priority for JV/FR was outlined to Council in the August 2013 workshop: Land type Scale Target area Landowner. Any JV/FR brought forward to Council will have to meet these criteria, with more emphasis being put on target area (ie. the original priority catchments) and early notice to Council of potential negotiations. Issues for 2016-17 – potentially one JV/FR to come forward, this has been raised with Council through updates in the Catchment Operations Committee Reports however there has been no formal approach as yet. The aim will be to raise any proposal with Council at the earliest opportunity.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 125
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
. Re costing of the JV/FR programmes. Ongoing quality and growth assessments result in changes to the timing of the silviculture and management requirements of these forests. This year we propose to revisit the costing of these programmes and to
incorporate these into improved individual management plans for each forest. Item 10 Item Issues for 2016-17 – a lot of work has been carried out on improving the recording of the growth, silvilculture and management of individual FR/JV programmes and compartments within them. A report will be brought to Council this year. . Critical assessment of issues raised in the external forest valuation. The forest valuation was completed by Woodnet in order to satisfy Council’s external audit requirements. However, some issues have been raised within that exercise, such as addressing the carbon implications within the FR document and how to value alternate species with a life and harvest date beyond the FR expiry. Issues for 2016-17 – this is an ongoing process. Each FR/JV landowner has been visited, any issues have been outlined. Issues will be included in the FR/JV report. . Managed retirement. Part of the contract agreement with MPI was to present a suitable funding option(s) around the work class “Managed Retirement”. This has been completed with assistance from the SLUI Advisory Group but needs more work with
MPI in order to advance.
Issues for 2016-17 – this is has been completed and approval gained from MPI. Staff are now implementing these guidelines. . Release of the report from Landcare Research on the impact of climate change scenarios on SLUI effectiveness.
AnnexB Issues for 2016-17 – this report has been presented to Council. No specific issue at this stage for SLUI. The report does highlight increased frequency and intensity of storm events, likely to decrease the effectiveness of SLUI works. . Improvements in internal financial processes (as outlined in Audit), process for Council to agree to funding variations, creating Purchase Orders when goods and services are committed, amortising JV cost monthly rather than year end, regular review of JV coding to ensure expenses are correctly coded – operational vs capital. Most of these are in place and will be monitored this year for any further changes that may be required. Issues for 2016-17 – these have all been implemented and are working well, no changes required at this stage. . Continue investigation into an on-farm “SLUI report card” as a way of indicating to landowners the overall environmental progress being made on-farm. Potential for this development may be included in the study programme for students at Massey University. Issues for 2016-17 – this work is continuing, Massey University students developed two report card proposals. One has been further developed and tested on two SLUI farms, a work in progress. . Continue investigation into developing land use/on-farm optimisation. Issues for 2016-17 – no progress in 2015-16, not a priority at this stage although it does fit neatly with Accelerate>25 and some work being completed as part of Primary Growth Partnership programmes. We will keep options open to progressing this work if opportunities arise. . Investigate potential for reviews of WFP to be carried out which will identify “extra” works completed by farmers, changes in farm production, resilience and economic activity.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 126
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Issues for 2016-17 – this was introduced to Council as part of the February 2016
workshop. Staff undertook to implement a review and five year work plan with WFP clients. The process has been agreed and staff have started this work. . Receive a preliminary proposal from AgResearch on farmer resilience after flood events and how implementing the SLUI programme has influenced this. Potentially fund further work in this area. 10 Item Issues for 2016-17 – underway, see comments earlier in this section, report due October 2016. . Part fund and participate in Massey University research projects which will influence future SLUI activities, including monitoring earthflow movement at Utiku, development of on-farm irrigation near Pahiatua and environmental cost and benefits of hill country cropping. Issues for 2016-17 – continuing, funding via SLUI Scholarships. Council were presented a video highlighting earthflow movement at Catchment Operations Committee in March 2016. . Support the Sustainable Farming Fund application by McIvor and Douglas for an external audit of the growth and effectiveness of tree planting. Issues for 2016-17 – funding bid unsuccessful, no further action. . Continue to investigate on farm projects which will assist SLUI uptake, including trial “chiba” poplar and Lombardy poplar favoured for their compact growth, detention and sediment control dams, potential effects of Giant Willow Aphid. Issues for 2016-17 – ongoing, trial started on “chiba” poplar, some sediment control dams are in place and yet to be assessed, Giant Willow Aphid trials
established. AnnexB
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 127
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
6 Other non target and non financial work for 2016-17 change to 5.2
Item 10 Item Last years Operational Plan commented on matters arising out of the Council SLUI workshop 23 June 2015. Issues needed to be brought back to the Council were summarised into three areas: Strategic Assessment Issues broadly fitting into this area: . Future of SLUI funding, cost share arrangements; Progress made 2015-16 – none. Issues for 2016-17 – this is a Governance issue and may need to be addressed at a workshop after Council elections in October. . Farm output changes resulting from SLUI methods; Progress made 2015-16 – little progress so far, the SLUI WFP contractor has carried out three farm reviews which may go some way toward addressing this issue. One review is due to be written up as a case study, awaiting draft
document.
Issues for 2016-17 – review case study before deciding how much further to pursue this. . Target agribusiness growth to lever more dollars;
Progress made in 2015-16 – none, this doesn’t appear to be core SLUI work, is AnnexB this essentially Accelerate>25? Issues for 2016-17 – no plans to progress at this stage. . Broadening the scope of SLUI (economic drivers?); Progress made in 2015-16 – none, this doesn’t appear to be core SLUI work, is this essentially Accelerate>25? - Issues for 2016-17 – no plans to progress at this stage. . Comparison of farm values SLUI vs non-SLUI; Progress made in 2015-16 – none. Issues for 2016-17 – not sure if this is an issue. In a report to a Council workshop in 2010 the feedback from a farm valuer was based on farmland in forestry vs pasture. This question implies there is a positive or negative effect on farm values as a result of landowners implementing a SLUI WFP. Some of the independent survey work being carried out by AgResearch (due to report in October 2016) may give a lead on this topic. . Future of SLUI WFPs (linked to broadening scope?); Progress made in 2015-16 – none. Issues for 2016-17 – not sure if broadening the scope of SLUI WFP is an issue. It is not part of the work plan for the Land Team. Last year there was considerable discussion on the potential to charge or part charge for WFP. At this stage there will be no charging for WFP but this may be revisited in the future. . Restoring HCEF funding to previous levels; Progress made in 2015-16 – none.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 128
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Issues for 2016-17 – if this is a major concern then restoration of funding levels
would seem to require representations to MPI at a Governance and Executive level. No plans to lobby MPI at this stage. Science
Issues broadly fitting into this area: 10 Item . How well has SLUI worked? Progress made 2015-16 – there have been a large number of science reports around erosion processes in New Zealand and some on the progress of SLUI. A full list of these reports was presented in last years Operational Plan, including the following internal Council link; \\file\herman\D\SR\01\01\HRC Science Reports and Publications\Originals During 2015-16 further reports were presented including the final GNS report from the June 2015 storm (GNS 2015/172), the NIWA report on climate change, the Landcare research report on the impacts of climate change on SLUI and the updated LCR report on SLUI progress. Internally, the February 2016 Council Workshop presented the staff view of SLUI progress and ways of reporting this progress. Issues for 2016-17 – staff will continue to report to Catchment Operations
Committee in the agreed new format, this will provide more emphasis in identifying progress of works by land priority. A SedNet update will be completed with the inclusion of all works completed to 30 June 2016. Further NIWA work on likely scenarios on river flows is being planned. Staff will also start to present to Catchment Operations Committee the progress being made and the outcomes of
the Plan reviews and Five Year Work Plans. AnnexB . What information are we getting from the river sediment monitoring data, and does this support SLUI? Progress made 2015-16 – as reported by the Senior Scientist Water Quality. “There was the work done by Hicks and Hoyle in 2012 that showed there were weak improving trends (decreasing sediment) in event sediment yield in a number of catchments although these trends are relatively weak, they provide some cautious optimism that soil conservation efforts of the past decade are helping to improve water quality. Sites showing improvement are: the Makuri, Tiraumea, Mangatainoka, Pohangina, Manawatu at Hopelands, Owhanga and Rangitikei at Mangaweka. Our continuous sediment monitoring programme, which monitors the effectiveness of measures to control erosion, was described by NIWA scientists as “the most extensive of any in New Zealand”. Horizons SOE report 2013. Essentially we will look for trends in reduction in load over time to measure effectiveness.” Issues for 2016-17 – staff will continue to liaise with the science team internally and with national science providers to continue work on improving our links to sediment and erosion. Further work is planned this year on tracing sediment back to catchment source. Our sediment reporting data will be important for this work. . Re-evaluate the effectiveness of various SLUI methods (work types – are they fit for purpose and impacts of pasture vs trees?) Analysis of 2015 event (are priority areas correct? Are works working?) Progress made 2015-16 – the GNS report (GNS 2015/172), whilst not an evaluation on the effectiveness of SLUI methods did provide a useful reinforcement of the other erosion reports completed over the years. The GNS report noted in the Abstract page v that; “Landsliding was largely confined to areas
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 129
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
of pasture, or recently planted or logged forest. Landsliding was infrequent in areas of indigenous forest and scrub, and closed canopy exotic plantation forest.” The Council workshop in February 2016 supported the view that appropriately targeted works will have the best outcome in reducing erosion and the amount of
sediment entering water. Item 10 Item Issues for 2016-17 – staff will continue to report to Catchment Operations Committee. . Environmental consequences (intended and unintended, shading and loss of pasture, legacy of works like Old Man Poplars, value of shade and shelter) Progress made 2015-16 – report presented to Council workshop in November 2015 and Catchment Operations Committee in November 2015 Issues for 2016-17 – staff will implement recommendations from November 2015 . Impacts of climate change Progress made 2015-16 – report received and presented to Council, see above Issues for 2016-17 – nothing specific at this stage . Impacts of SLUI works on overall farm production. Progress made 2015-16 – no specific progress made although some work is
moving in this direction including the SLUI WFP Survey, the Five Year reviews and the Case Studies commissioned. Issues for 2016-17 – staff will continue in attempts to develop in this area including further case studies on individual WFP.
Operational / Programme Delivery AnnexB Issues broadly fitting into this area: . Contestability, independent audit Progress made 2015-16 – a contestable tender process was carried out for delivery of WFP, this resulted in the average per ha cost of WFP dropping by about $2.00. A major SLUI survey was contracted to AgResearch, with joint funding from Ministry for the Environment. Where possible contestable and independent work and audits are carried out. The specific nature of some work requires this to be completed in – house by the Land Monitoring Coordinator and his staff or students. Issues for 2016-17 – nothing specific at this stage, will continue to apply contestability and independence where appropriate . Future proofing works (unintended consequences) – see Science (effectiveness, sediment and work types) Progress made 2015-16 – as well as effectiveness, this subject was about the issues such as Old Man Poplars or afforestation on the wrong site appearing to be the correct technique but having consequences later. Staff always use the best available information in making or supporting on farm land use decisions, this is one reason why we strongly support the use of farm plan. The resource information within a plan aids sound decision making. Issues for 2016-17 – nothing specific at this stage, will continue to support sound decisions based on resource information. . Ten year audit Progress made 2015-16 – this work has started with the SLUI Survey and the Five Year Reviews.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 130
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Issues for 2016-17 – SLUI Survey results due October, 10 year review to be
completed after that. This is noted in the Contract Milestones as a SLUI engagement survey. . WFP cost and benefits
Progress made 2015-16 – report received and presented to Council, see above. 10 Item Issues for 2016-17 – nothing specific at this stage.
AnnexB
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 131
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
7 Summary 2015-16 Reporting
The issues under the control of GEM Land are proposed to be brought to Catchment Operations Committee as follows:
August to November (two meetings); Item 10 Item . Annual report on FR/JV forest, growth and management . Progress on WFP effectiveness survey (SLUI survey) . Completed case study . Final report on Mitigation package . Copy of report to MPI on Resilience Package. January to March (1 meeting); . Terms of Reference for SLUI 10-year review . Update on SedNet results. April to June (2 meetings); . Appropriate grant rates, impacts of any changes, lower grant rates (this will be
discussed with SLUI Advisory Group).
AnnexB
Photo 3: Riparian retirement, Ruapehu District (Photo Weston Brown)
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 132
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
10 Item
Whanganui Catchment Strategy Operational Plan 2016-17
AnnexC
July 2016
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 133
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
Endorsed by Council at the Catchment Operations meeting on xxx
Author Sarah Nicholson, Environmental Management Officer – Land Grant Cooper, Environmental Manager (Land)
Acknowledgements to Horizons Regional Council
Front Cover Photo Horizons Regional Council
AnnexC
July 2016 ISBN: 978-1-927259-58-0 Report No: 2015/EXT/1489
CONTACT 24 hr Freephone 0508 800 800 [email protected] www.horizons.govt.nz
Kairanga Cnr Rongotea and Levin Kairanga-Bunnythorpe 11 Bruce Road Roads Palmerston North Palmerston North 11-15 Victoria Avenue Taihape SERVICE REGIONAL DEPOTS Torere Road CENTRES HOUSES Marton Wanganui Ohotu Hammond Street 181 Guyton Street Woodville Taumarunui 116 Vogel Street 34 Maata Street
POSTAL Horizons Regional Council, Private Bag 11025, Manawatu Mail Centre, Palmerston North 4442 F 06 9522 929 ADDRESS
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 134
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
CONTENTS
1 Introduction 5
1.1 Background 5 Item 10 Item 1.2 Purpose of the Operational Plan 6 2 Actions and Expenditure 7 2.1 Whanganui Catchment Strategy 7 2.2 Whanganui River Enhancement Trust 8 2.3 Catchment Demonstration Farm 9 2.4 Nursery 11 3 Targets and Summary Expenditure 13 3.1 Summary Expenditure 13 3.2 Targets 13 3.3 Environmental Grant (WCS/WRET) 14 4 Reporting 15
4.1 Bi Monthly 15
4.2 Annual Report 15 5 Appendices 17 5.1 Supporting Maps 17
AnnexC
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 135
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexC
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 136
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
1 Introduction
1.1 Background Item 10 Item
The activities described in this Operational Plan form part of the Catchment Management group of activities in Horizons’ Long-term Plan 2015-25. Under the Resource Management Act 1991, Horizons has statutory responsibilities to ensure sustainable use and management of the region’s land and soil resources. The Whanganui Catchment Strategy (WCS) project relates to the activities introduced in 1997 that focus on the Whanganui River catchment. It aims to prioritise an incentive programme in the area and ultimately the strategy aims to address erosion hot spots that affect downstream water quality. The strategy goals are: To maintain the water quality of the Whanganui River at a standard that protects its cultural and amenity values, and life supporting capacity. To achieve land management that minimises the extent of accelerated soil erosion. The activities link directly to the non-regulatory methods of the One Plan (Chapter 5, Policies 5-1 and 5-5), and more specifically the Whanganui Catchment Strategy is noted as a project under the methods: Project description The aim of this project is to reduce hill country accelerated erosion within the Whanganui
catchment. While emphasis is to be on hill country land subject to an elevated risk of AnnexC accelerated erosion, all land at risk of erosion within the catchment will be eligible for assistance under this programme. Staff from Horizons Regional Council and consultants will work with landowners to develop management plans. These plans will provide the blueprint for long-term environmental, economic and social sustainability. Research, publicity, education, information, and incentives will be used to encourage the landowner or occupier to manage their land in a sustainable manner. Who Horizons Regional Council, Ruapehu District Council and Wanganui District Council, landowners or occupiers, relevant hapu and iwi, the Whanganui River Enhancement Trust (WRET), Department of Conservation, recognised organisations representing farmers and farm consultants. Links to Policy This method links to Policy 5-1. Targets 50% of properties within hill country land subject to an elevated risk of accelerated erosion in the Whanganui Catchment will have a voluntary management plan in place by 2015. Implementation of the land rules of the One Plan will involve Policy 5-2A regarding regulation of vegetation clearance, land disturbance, forestry and cultivation.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 137
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
1.2 Purpose of the Operational Plan
This plan aims to set out the scope, work types and targets to be delivered within the approved funding.
. Scope – there are six main work areas within this project: Item 10 Item Whole Farm Plans: Continue to provide farm plans, either by internal staff or consultants in the priority areas of the Ohura, Waikaka, Waitewhena and Tokorima catchments. We have cut back on numbers of new plans in recent years as there are few farmers who haven’t been contacted to ascertain if they would take up a farm plan; Incentives: Continue to fund environmental works to areas under operational farm plans and erosion “hot spots” throughout the Whanganui Catchment. Funding from the Whanganui River Enhancement Trust (WRET) is managed to assist this programme; Advice: Continue to provide advice throughout the catchment, as requested from landowners, and be more proactive through active membership of the Taumarunui Sustainable Land Management Group; Nurseries: Funded from the “land” budget but oversight of nurseries in Taumarunui (depot, Ohura and Manunui), along with any promotion and development of on- farm or new supplies, are managed from this area. Continue to develop three on-
farm nurseries in the Ruapehu area with funding support from WRET;
One Plan implementation: The land issues regarding cultivation, earth disturbance, vegetation clearance and forestry will require advice and issuing consents. The decision has been made that this work will be carried out and charged within normal operational activities within this budget or the Regional and
Coast budget; and AnnexC Demonstration Farm: In its third year with support from WRET. This farm aims to demonstrate sustainable land use, costs and benefits from environmental works and economic benefits from sustainable land use. Work will continue this year with continuation of the work programme, monitoring of the sediment dams and a field day. . Types of work: Staff will provide information, advice and assistance as required. As with the Sustainable Land Use Initiative (SLUI), the work is much more proactive than traditional “soil conservation” advice. The upper Ohura and Waikaka catchments have been considered priority areas and recently we have added the Waitewhena and Tokorima catchments. In these areas we actively promote farm plans and environmental programmes with grant assistance from WCS and WRET. . Targets: Specific targets are set relating to successful engagement with landowners (number of plans, number of grant projects, hectares protected). Currently there are no specific targets relating to catchment outcomes, but as with SLUI, we hope to be able to report catchment outcomes (tonnes of sediment reduction) in the future. . Funding: As outlined in the Long-term Plan, this work is to be General Rate funded. . Note – the storm event of June 2015 caused considerable damage in the lower Whanganui Catchment, and many properties not targeted under the SLUI have issues relating to flood damage, soil erosion, stream bank erosion etc. Small blocks and lifestyle block owners have been seeking advice in larger numbers than in the past. This may result in a short term spike in work programmes with use of grant funding, small plans and advice in these areas. This is, in reality, business as usual but with a higher demand on staff time.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 138
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
2 Actions and Expenditure
2.1 Whanganui Catchment Strategy
This work continues the pre-SLUI primary function of the Environmental Management 10 Item Officers (Land). Traditionally this work was mostly reactive and involved giving advice to landowners about erosion and land use when asked, but since the late 1990s changes have been made by incorporating farm environment plans and priority catchment approaches. Staff have provided advice and information to largely rural landowners and Environmental Grant funds for eligible erosion control, water quality and biodiversity works. Within the Whanganui Catchment work has been delivered via the following approaches: . Priority catchment based around sub-catchments of the Ohura River. Research by Horizons and Landcare Research has shown that the Ohura Catchment is the biggest contributor of sediment into the Whanganui River. Further to this it was determined that much of the sediment derived from the Ohura catchment was due to a combination of natural processes from the underlying geology, and land uses that were beyond the inherent capability of the land. The Whanganui Catchment Strategy is focused on matching land use with land type and improving water quality; . Within this area the Upper Ohura, Waikaka, Tokorima and Waitewhena areas were
identified as priority areas to promote voluntary farm plans, with the aim of encouraging
farmers to commit to a planned, long term work programme to reduce erosion. The programme uses Environmental Grant (E-grant) funds from Horizons and WRET to encourage work to be undertaken; . “Hot spot” identification and treatment of erosion. These areas will be treated as a “one off” erosion problem. The programme uses E-grant funds from Horizons and WRET to encourage work to be undertaken; AnnexC . Develop the Demonstration Farm Plan within the Ohura Catchment (see 2.3); . Support and liaise with Biodiversity and Freshwater Teams to ensure advice is consistent and allocation of E-grant funds is appropriate; . Provide advice and information to local iwi and hapu on erosion and sustainable land use options. There has been an increased level of interest from these groups over the last 12-18 months; . Provide free land use consents (cultivation, earth disturbance and vegetation clearance) to landowners to the protocol signed off by Council; . Provide advice to landowners, contractors and forestry consultants around the Permitted Activity status of forestry under the One Plan (noting the proposed National Environmental Standard (NES) for forestry may result in extra work, advice and education for landowners if it is introduced in 2016-17); . Provide advice to Consents department regarding any full consent issues around land use; . Provide support to other parts of Horizons business more generally in regard to consent and compliance issues in the northern Ruapehu area; and . Provide timely advice to ratepayers.
Table 1: Summary of Expenditure Internal Hours Staff time 1,020
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 139
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Table 2: Overall budget up by $1,907 or 1% from 2015-16 Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue$ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Whanganui Catchment 3,150 101,524 7,000 97,674 Item 10 Item E-grant 112,000 62,000 50,000
AnnexC
Photo 1: Proposed wetland retirement and enhancement project (photo S. Nicholson)
2.2 Whanganui River Enhancement Trust
Whanganui River Enhancement Trust has been supporting the WCS since 2006. The continued financial support from WRET sends a good message to landowners and renewed focus for staff, with a third party supporting their efforts to undertake environmental works. The WCS programme still enjoys a greater level of acceptance in the Ruapehu area than the SLUI programme. The reporting of works by land type and through mapping work done (recorded in shapefiles and available for reporting) has encouraged staff to be more focused. WRET recognises Horizons as a strategic partner in its 2013-16 Strategic Plan. With WRET support, Horizons will continue to fund environmental works, with grant rates and total grant at higher rates than can be applied by using the Environmental Grant criteria alone as the maximum grant of 30% and $10,000 per proposal does not apply. WRET funding also allows grant money to be spent on environmental works that may not be eligible under Horizons funding, for example some areas of riparian retirement and grant investment on dairy farms.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 140
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
WRET has contributed more than $50,000 annually to support grant projects. This support is subject to an annual application from Horizons to WRET at its Annual General Meeting,, usually in August. There is some risk that if Horizons was not successful in obtaining this funding, we would have to cancel or cut back approvals for some grant projects.
2.3 Catchment Demonstration Farm 10 Item
Horizons and WRET continued with the demonstration property within the Ohura Catchment. This project was initiated with a field day and signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between Horizons, WRET and Evan and Roseanne Parkes, at Matiere, on 23 June 2014. A feild day was held in February 2016 with a speaker highlighting the need for resilience in a changing climate. The programme will continue this year with the same objectives, namely to: . Establish a prototype environmental property on a working farm with a usual farm management structure; . Set up workable environmental solutions that are farmer-critiqued and established; . Hold working field days where landowners can view the establishment of an environmental property on a working farm and view environmental works in action; . Establish a working educational process for the Whanganui River Enhancement Trust (WRET) and Horizons Regional Council, to lift the profile of reducing accelerated erosion and sedimentation; . Have ongoing maintenance programmes established and undertaken in working situations; and . The Horizons’ staff time to develop and run this programme will be funded from the
existing WCS budget. WRET is proposing to fund an extra $35,000 for this case study AnnexC property over the next three years.
Table 3: Summary of Contributions (WRET) Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue$ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ WRET Funding to 0 0 3,000 0 WCS
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 141
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexC
Figure 1: Demonstration farm field day advertisement
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 142
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
2.4 Nursery Council owns or leases three pole nurseries at locations in the Ruapehu District (Ohura, Depot, Manunui). Horizons also liaise with a number of local growers to purchase poles from them to on-sell. The poles grown or supplied are made available for E-grant jobs within WCS and SLUI for the Ruapehu District. Currently, pole demand exceeds supply and there is an indication that demand will continue to grow with SLUI and WCS grant funding of 10 Item projects. The cost of running the nursery is covered under the Regional and Coast section of the Land budget. The staff expertise and advice to third parties comes from the WCS labour budget. WRET have also assisted with the set up funding for up to three private/on-farm nurseries within the priority catchment area. Site one was established in September 2014 and site two in spring 2015. The third site is planned for establishment this spring. The first harvest from site one should occur in winter 2017. Under this proposal, Horizons will continue to provide advice and expertise to help establish and manage the nurseries as well as purchasing the poles grown. WRET will fund a proportion of the set-up costs.
Table 4: Summary of Contributions to Nursery development (WRET) Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue$
Expenditure $ Expenditure $ WRET Funding to 0 0 4,000 0 WCS
AnnexC
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 143
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexC
Photos 2 and 3: Mangapapa nursery site preparation, May 2015 (top) as appeared in 2015-16 Operational Plan and photo 3 established poplars April 2016 (photos W. Brown)
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 144
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
3 Targets and Summary Expenditure
3.1 Summary Expenditure Item 10 Item Table 5: Summary of Expenditure Expenditure Funded By Activity External Internal Revenue $ Rate Revenue$ Expenditure $ Expenditure $ Whanganui Catchment 3,339 99,428 95,767 E-grant 50,000 50,000 WRET E-grant 62,000 62,000 WRET case study 0 3,000 WRET nursery 0 4,000 Total 115,339 99,428 69,000 145,767
3.2 Targets
Realistic targets are difficult to set for activities that involve a mix of promotion, information, advice and assistance. The following Operational Plan targets have been set, with the Annual Plan targets highlighted in bold font. Table 6: Summary of Targets Activity Targets Operational Plan and Annual 1. Produce two WCS plans per year Plan targets 2. Manage E-grant programme to carry out 25 projects AnnexC or spend all the grant allocation ($50,000 plus WRET $53,000) 3. Target 150 ha of land improvement projects through E-grant assistance 4. Carry out the agreed WRET programme and supply an Annual Report to WRET 5. Provide bi monthly reports to Catchment Operations Committee of Council 6. Provide copies of bi monthly reports to WRET on request 7. Provide a minimum of two progress reports to WRET 8. Continue demonstration farm with at least one field day by 30 June 2017 9. Manage consent process for land use consents within Whanganui Catchment; if consent is required, to be produced within five working days 10. Visit every WCS farm plan landowner at least once per year 11. Sell all poles produced from council nursery 12. Grow pole production from Taumarunui/Ruapehu wider supply (to be more self-sufficient) 13. Develop one new nursery with funding assistance from WRET.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 145
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
3.3 Environmental Grant (WCS/WRET)
Funding of work programmes is provided through the E-grant Programme (E- grant). The aim of the E-grant is to support and encourage work to be done on erodible land. In providing grant money Horizons can influence the work carried out in a number of ways: Item 10 Item . At the base level the grant may provide the impetus to get some work done; . It may encourage farmers to do more or complete programmes at a faster rate; and . It may offer enough incentive to improve the technical quality of the work, through planting at appropriate spacing, use of better species, greater setbacks, etc. In the past E-grant funding through the Land team has supported a mix of works in a variety of landforms (biodiversity, water quality, erosion control on dairy, sheep and other farm types or land uses). Under the WCS a specific E-grant fund of $50,000 has been put aside for works within the catchment that will meet the WCS objectives. WCS/WRET E-grant projects carried out in 2015-16 included: . 62 project applications (9 cancelled, 2 transferred to 2016-17, 2 to resilience funding and 1 to SLUI); . If all 58 projects went ahead a grant allocation of $125,510 would have been required; . 48 projects were completed at a grant cost of $73,756;
. The grant costs were funded by Horizons and WRET; and . 49 projects resulted in approximately 1,676 trees planted, 2,009 poles, 19.9 km of fencing, and 146 ha of area protected. . The Operational Plan target of 150 ha was met, there is a discrepancy between the
Operational Plan and Annual Plan target, the Annual Plan target was 200 ha. AnnexC The WCS E-grant projects for 2016-17 have the same grant allocation of $50,000 and it is anticipated this will be supplemented by $62,000 from WRET. Management of the allocation of funds is always a delicate balance in order not to over-approve and have more funds requested than available, against the knowledge that some jobs do not go ahead and there are often savings in jobs that are approved. The support of WRET allows Horizons more flexibility in spreading the grant allocation within the WCS. The rules around allocation are: . The work types eligible for grant funding are limited and outlined in protocols. If work does not fit these protocols but still has an environmental benefit, then WRET funding may be utilised; . The grant rate for Horizons share is to be up to 30%. In exceptional circumstances this can be exceeded but only with sign off of a senior officer. WRET funding can be added to this grant rate for jobs that have a direct benefit to water quality, those best meeting WRET objectives; . The maximum grant allocation per project is $10,000 and WRET funding can be added; . Approved projects will be paid out on actual and reasonable grant cost up to but not exceeding the approved amount; . First priority for approval goes to projects with a WSC farm plan and secondly to identified erosion “hot spot” areas. This supports WRET’s requirement for priority to be in the Ohura Catchment; and At 18 July 2016, 31 projects had been approved with an estimated grant allocation of $58,496.
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 146
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
4 Reporting
4.1 Bi Monthly Item 10 Item Reporting to the Catchment Operations Committee, these reports would provide an update of the progress against the targets as agreed in this Operational Plan (or as presented in the Annual Plan). The report would also include a general update on activities being undertaken and any new issues as they arise. Additional reporting is carried out for the WRET (Whanganui River Enhancement Trust).
4.2 Annual Report
A report against Annual Plan targets only.
AnnexC
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 147
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexC
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 148
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
5 Appendices
5.1 Supporting Maps
Item 10 Item
AnnexC
Map 1: Land Management Zones
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 149
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexC
Map 2: Location of environmental-grants
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 150
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexC
Map 3: Work Types
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 151
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Item 10 Item
AnnexC
Map 4: WCS Works 2006-2015
Regional Coast & Land Operational Plan 2016-17 Page 152
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Report No. 16-157 Information Only - No Decision Required
REGIONAL COAST AND LAND
11 Item
1. PURPOSE 2. This report is to update Members of the progress on Council’s Regional Land and Coast activities from 17th May to 30th June 2016.
3. RECOMMENDATION That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-157.
4. FINANCIAL IMPACT 4.1. There is no financial impact associated with recommendations in this paper.
5. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 5.1. This is a public item and therefore Council may deem this sufficient to inform the public.
6. SIGNIFICANT BUSINESS RISK IMPACT 6.1. There are no significant risks inherent in the adoption of recommendations contained in this report.
7. OUTPUTS (Final for 2015-16)
Table 1: Operational Plan targets (Annual Plan targets in bold) YTD REPORTING PERIOD TARGET % MEASURE ACTUAL 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Soil health workshops 0 0 0 2 2 2 100 Produce soil health plans 0 0 start 2 2 2 100 Produce Environmental Farm Plans 0 0 start 3 3 5 60 Environmental grant projects 34 7 1 10 52 50 104 Implement SOE Soil programme 0 start 1 1 1 100 Fund Poplar and Willow Trust 0 1 0 0 1 1 100 Fund and support Ballance Farm Environment 0 start 1 1 1 100 Awards to complete annual programme Other industry partnerships supported 0 start 4 4 4 100 Manage HRC nurseries to produce poplar 0 14,333 14,333 14,000 poles (poles produced winter 2015) 116 Source additional poplar poles (poles sourced) 0 17,050 17,050 13,000 Provide technical support to P&W Research Trust 0 0 1 1 1 100 to provide sites for trial and bulking new clones One Plan Implementation (in field consents) 7 5 9 19 40 NA One Plan Implementation (forest sediment control 0 7 10 20 37 NA plans) Land improvement (hectares protected) 0 16 28 74 118 150 79
Regional Coast and Land Page 153
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
8. DISCUSSION
Activity: 8.1. Late May and June have been warm and wet. Grass growth has been steady throughout
Item 11 Item winter saving many farmers who went into winter with low pasture covers. Areas are now beginning to have issues with pasture utilisation as continued wet conditions lead to pugging and trampling of pasture. On the east (Tararua), recent rain has been welcomed but overall winter rainfall is still down on average and farmers are concerned for spring water tables. 8.2. Overall the rain has come late, some farmers have cancelled pole orders with concern that ground was too dry for planting, at this time most areas will have sufficient soil moisture to plant and establish poles.
Implementation:
8.3. This activity group (Regional Land) has seen a total of 52 Environmental Grant projects approved with a total cost of $333,249 and a grant cost of $87,234. Five projects have been transferred to other funding streams (1 to SLUI, 3 to Freshwater, 1 to Whanganui Catchment Strategy), two have been postponed and four not completed. 8.4. A total of 36 claims have been completed; 27 for space planting, three for afforestation, two for riparian, and one each for bush retirement, earthworks, wetland and native plant establishment. Additionally five school dynex recycling claims were completed. Overall these claims have had a grant cost of $46,719. 8.5. Three farms have had an Environmental Property Plans (EPPs) completed, against a target of 5. Field work has been completed on three others. The EPP work is used largely as training in farm plan mapping for less experienced staff. 8.6. An interim report was prepared for the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) noting progress on expenditure of the resilience funding. This fund of $150,000 was received after the June 2015 storm and was for; “building future resilience generally, acknowledging Regional Council projects in this area, rather than being based on storm impacts.” 8.7. Initially it was unclear when and how this fund could be spent, it also coincided with the Councils own pole planting mitigation package. After some correspondence with MPI an agreement was reached for the fund to be available until August 2016 to allow works to be carried out over this winters planting season. Staff have identified projects allocating the full $150,000 from MPI on a grant basis (50-70%). Up until the end of June $69,820 has been claimed.
Industry Partnerships:
8.8. The Ballance Farm Environment Awards (BFEA) programme has been completed with this years Supreme Award Winners Field Day held on the 29th June. The day was cold and wet but a good crowd of 60 -70 turned out to hear presentations on the farm and complete a farm walk. A very good article was published in the Wanganui Chronicle on the 14th July. 8.9. The Horizons Region BFEA sponsorship funding agreement expires this year. A new “partnership agreement” has been supplied by the Trust for our comment. We have offered some alterations and will consider the changes that have come back before committing to a new two year agreement. 8.10. The local BFEA committee are considering running a farm wetland seminar in conjunction with Massey University and NIWA as an introduction and tempter to new entrants to the 2016/17 awards. This seminar is proposed for 25th August in Feilding. In the meantime entries are now open and staff are contacting landowners they think may be interested in entering.
Regional Coast and Land Page 154
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
8.11. Staff have continued to discuss issues with Beef + Lamb New Zealand (B+L NZ). We have made contact with Kylie Brewer their new Environmental Extension Manager and offered to support a LEP workshop in Pahiatua. 8.12. The Land Manager attended the Middle Districts Farm Forestry dinner at Bulls where the
speakers topic was alternative species research. 11 Item 8.13. Staff assisted Ian McIvor of the Poplar and Willow Research Trust (P&WRT) in measuring trial sites. The aim is to observe any willow growth issues as a result of the Giant Willow Aphid. 8.14. Ian McIvor reported finding Giant Willow Aphid in our kawa planting at Bulls. 8.15. Grant McLaren attended the P&WRT Technical Advisory group meeting 8.16. The P&WT released a media article on the impacts and work being carried out to combat the Giant Willow Aphid. This release included comment on the trial set up by Grant McLaren in the Tararua District (see 8.10). The trust also released a document entitled “Hill Country Heroes”, outlining the work of the trust and the role of poplars and willows in hill country. 8.17. Three staff attended an East Coast Land Managers facilitated workshop in Napier. This is a follow up from the conference last October. The aim is to look for common issues and common work around land use in the east coast hill country. Horizons, Gisborne, Hawkes Bay and Wellington staff attended.
Photo 1: Giant Willow Aphid on willow (photo courtesy P&WRT)
Regional Coast and Land Page 155
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Nursery:
8.18. Woodville: Contractor engaged to assist pole harvest with harvest commencing in early June. At present harvest is going to plan, with completion expected mid to late July.
Original pole orders have fallen by around 4,000 (see comments in SLUI report). Item 11 Item 8.19. Bulls: Harvesting commenced on 7th June using a mix of casual and contract labour. 8.20. In the Northern Nurseries contractors have completed harvesting at Ohura (this has included clearing out old poles for the introduction of new stools this spring), the Manunui and Taumarunui Yard nurseries will be harvested in July. 8.21. Weber: contractor has completed harvest. 8.22. Aokautere: we have a contract to harvest, work began on 17th June. 8.23. Management contract with David Murray has been negotiated and drawn up ready for signing. 8.24. The lease agreement with Murrays Nursery Ltd is on hold, awaiting a decision on irrigation. 8.25. Staff have begun collecting poles from external suppliers in the Hawkes Bay and Wairarapa areas.
Soil Health: 8.26. Two soil health plans were completed as were two soil health workshops. 8.27. The SOE Soil Health monitoring field work has been completed and we are awaiting the final lab results. Once these are received a brief report will be provided to this committee. 8.28. Malcolm Todd is continuing his work in the review of erosion indicators for State of Environment reporting as part of the Land Monitoring Forum. These indicators will become the national standard for environmental reporting.
Advice and Information: 8.29. Environmental grant projects were completed for freshwater (6) and biodiversity (1). 8.30. A presentation was made to Taihape Area School students on the work carried out by Land staff in the area. 8.31. Staff have visited 27 landowners primarily to give advice on next years works programmes including: . Poplar and willow pole planting and silviculture (2); . E grant advice and preparation of proposals for 2016/17 (15); . Manuka planting and possible AGS funding (4); . Riparian and freshwater proposals (5); and . Winter grazing management (1).
Training: 8.32. Three staff attended an internally run programme on making presentations. 8.33. One staff member has been accepted into the MWLASS graduate training programme which runs through until November. 8.34. Four staff attended a Ravensdown/Primary Growth Partnership workshop on precision fertilizer application for hill country.
Regional Coast and Land Page 156
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
One Plan Implementation: 8.35. Fifteen staff have totalled 657 hours work on One Plan implementation this year. The statistics on number of consents issued doesn’t tell the full story of the work being carried
out in this area. Work this period includes: 11 Item . One inspection regarding sand dune re shaping by Horewhenua District Council involving a minor breach of their consent; . Three inspections with roading contractors to discuss culverts and flumes; . Three on farm inspections advising on requirements for a consent for culverts; . A number of forestry follow up inspections where there is concern the ESCP is not being followed; . A number of visits to logging sites where an ESCP has not been lodged or the forester has not given notice of harvesting; . Six on farm land use consents were issued in this period.
8.36. Total consents issued to date are recorded by type and location: Table 2: Land Use Consents Issued Location Consent Type Regional and Coast Total WCS Area Area Vegetation clearance 7 7 14 Cultivation > 20 degrees 0 4 4 Land disturbance < 20 degrees 2 6 8 Land disturbance >20 degrees 7 7 14 Total 16 24 40
9. SIGNIFICANCE 9.1. This is not a significant decision according to the Council’s Policy on Significance and Engagement.
Grant Cooper MANAGER - LAND
Jon Roygard GROUP MANAGER NATURAL RESOURCES & PARTNERSHIPS
ANNEXES There are no attachments for this report.
Regional Coast and Land Page 157
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Report No. 16-158 Information Only - No Decision Required
WHANGANUI CATCHMENT STRATEGY 12 Item
1. PURPOSE 1.1. This report is to update Members on progress on the Whanganui Catchment Strategy for the period 19th May to 30th June 2016.
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.1. The Whanganui Catchment Strategy (WCS) project relates to its ‘strategy’ activities introduced in 1997 which focus on the upper Whanganui River catchments and aim to prioritise an incentive programme in the area. Ultimately the strategy aims to address erosion ‘hot spots’ that affect downstream water quality. Funding from the Whanganui River Enhancement Trust (WRET) is managed to assist this programme.
3. RECOMMENDATION That the Committee recommends that Council: a. receives the information contained in Report No. 16-158.
4. FINANCIAL IMPACT 4.1. There is no financial impact associated with recommendations in this paper.
5. SIGNIFICANT BUSINESS RISK IMPACT 5.1. There are no significant risks inherent in the adoption of recommendations contained in this report.
6. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 6.1. This is a public item and therefore Council may deem this sufficient to inform the public.
7. OUTPUTS (Final for 2015/16)
Table 1: Operational Plan Targets (Annual Plan targets in bold) REPORTING PERIOD YTD MEASURE TARGET % 1st 2nd 3rd 4th ACTUAL WCS farm plans completed / delivered 0 0 0 1 1 2 50 Grant projects agreed 31 3 13 15 62 25 248 Complete Annual Report to WRET (2014-15) 1 0 0 0 1 1 100 Complete progress reports to WRET (2015-16) 0 0 1 1 2 2 100 Run Demonstration Farm Field Day 0 start 1 1 1 100 Establish new on farm pole nurseries with 1 start 1 2 2 100 WRET Land improvement (hectares protected) 0 16 15 120 151 150 101
Whanganui Catchment Strategy Page 159
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
8. DISCUSSION
Activity: 8.1. The lower catchment has changed from warm and dry to warm and wet over May and
Item 12 Item June, while in the upper catchment it has been a very wet autumn/early winter but still mild. Lack of significant frosts is a common theme this winter. 8.2. Andrew Gray our Coordinator for the WCS has taken 12 months Lifestyle Leave, his last day was Friday 1st July. Andrew’s Coordinator role will be shared by incumbent staff. George Powell will take this role for the first six months and Weston Brown the second six months. Andrews LMO day to day work will be covered by Bryan McCavana who is on a 12 month contract. 8.3. Pole and tree growth has been very good this year and winter conditions are setting us up for a good planting season. 8.4. The Central Government resilience package has been reported in the Regional and Coast report, however most of the works are within the Whanganui, Whangaehu and Turakina catchments. Winter planting projects are underway in order to have a final report to MPI by mid August. 8.5. Only one WCS/WRET farm plan has been completed this year, a further plan has been mapped and one other is on the list to be completed in 2016-17. 8.6. As well as completing inspections and claims for the 2015-16 works programme staff are giving advice and preparing Environmental Grant applications for next year. There are currently 31 approved works programmes for 2016-17. 8.7. Staff gave advice to Ruapehu District Council on pollarding poplars in the Te Peka reserve. 8.8. Staff were asked to give advice on winter grazing management, where the landowner is aiming to have buffer strips, and leave grazing next to watercourses until last in efforts to reduce sediment runoff.
Photo 1: Winter grazing management (photo Sarah Nicholson)
Whanganui Catchment Strategy Page 160
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
8.9. Staff were approached by the Ohura village community. Their local water supply comes from surrounding farm land and the community would like to see it fenced off and planted. The landowner was approached and offered riparian retirement grants. The landowner is considering this.
8.10. Staff are working with hapu on the Whanganui River looking for environmental projects. 12 Item
Implementation:
8.11. In total there were 62 projects approved for the WCS area for 2015-16. These projects had a total cost of $305,985 and grant funding of $125,510. The grant costs are shared between Horizons (allocated $50,000) and WRET ($53,000) plus demonstration farm costs ($7,000). This suggests an over allocation of funding, but this is managed through savings and cancellations throughout the year. 8.12. There were 48 claims completed with a final grant cost of $73,756. The bulk of this funding was allocated to WRET share of projects, leaving the Horizons grant funding under spent. 8.13. The grants were made up of; space planting (22), riparian retirement (9), wetlands and bush retirement (6 each), structures/earthworks (4) and afforestation (1). 8.14. Of the 14 projects not claimed; transferred to resilience (2), transferred to SLUI (1), postponed (2) and nine were cancelled. 8.15. The final area treated was 150.6 ha, this meets the Operational Plan target but not the Annual Plan target (200 ha). The aim was to lower the AP target to a more realistic figure but this was not done.
Implementation (WRET):
8.16. Staff have been in contact with WRET regarding a date for their AGM, once this is known a final report will be prepared for WRET along with an application for 2016-17 funding. 8.17. The third and final WRET nursery site has been found and will be established this spring. The landowner and Horizons staff will undertake establishment, the landowner will maintain the site and will obtain a share of the value of the poles harvested. 8.18. As noted in the previous report the works on the WRET Demonstration farm were held up due to the farmer having time off for a major operation. This work has now been completed. 8.19. WRET have indicated they would like to meet with Horizons to discuss their strategic plan, a meeting has been arranged for September.
One Plan Implementation:
8.20. One Plan implementation continues with vegetation clearance and earth disturbance consents issued. Staff have given advice on culverts, dam repair and forest harvesting. More detail is provided in the Regional and Coast Report. 8.21. One major vegetation clearance programme has involved a manuka planting project. Consent has been required as the area includes sites of rare and threatened habitat (Schedule F One Plan). Staff have been liaising with the Science team.
Other: 9. SIGNIFICANCE 9.1. This is not a significant decision according to the Council’s Policy on Significance and Engagement.
Whanganui Catchment Strategy Page 161
Catchment Operations Committee 10 August 2016
Grant Cooper MANAGER - LAND
Jon Roygard
GROUP MANAGER NATURAL RESOURCES & PARTNERSHIPS Item 12 Item
ANNEXES There are no attachments for this report.
Whanganui Catchment Strategy Page 162