4. Navigation Report

WESTERN FIRTH CONSORTIUM - NAVIGATION AND SAFETY ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED MARINE FARM DEVELOPMENT, WESTERN FIRTH OF THAMES

Larry Robbins OBE FNI PO Box 35-401 Browns Bay Auckland 0753

[email protected] 09 478 4782

CONTENTS Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

1.0 INTRODUCTION 5

1.1 Overview 5

1.2 Objectives of the Study 5

1.3 Qualifications & Experience Relevant to this Study 5

1.4 Methodology 6

2.0 THE PROJECT 6

2.1 Background and Aims of the Project 6

2.2 Location of the Project. 6

3.0 PORT & HARBOUR RISK ASSESSMENT 7

3.1 Introduction 7

3.2 Harbours and Ports 7

3.3 Navigation Safety Bylaw 8

3.4 Pilotage Area 9

3.5 Vessel Traffic in the Firth of Thames 9

3.6 Existing Navigational Hazards and Routes 16

3.7 Assessment 18

4.0 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS 19

4.1 Hazards posed by proposed marine farm 19

4.2 Navigational Marks – Proposed Marine Farm 19

5.0 CONSTRUCTION OF THE FARM 22

5.1 Precautions during Construction 22

5.2 Navigation warnings etc during construction 22

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 2

6.0 CONCLUSIONS 22

6.1 Conclusions 22

APPENDICES 23

A. References 24

B. Consultations and Discussions 26

C. Limits of the Proposed Marine Farm 27

D. Navigational Marks - General 28 E. Assessment in line with the New Zealand Port and Harbour 31 Marine Safety Code.

FIGURES

Figure 1 – Location Diagram 6

Figure 2 - Shipping Traffic overlay. 10

Figure 3 - The main vessel tracks in the wider area. 11

Figure 4 - Longline vessel KIM OCEAN at the wharf in Thames 12 Figure 5 - Screenshot showing tracks of HMNZS HAWEA on navigation 13 training in the Hauraki Gulf 31 October – 1 November 2016. Figure 6 - Boat Ramps in the Firth of Thames area. 14

Figure 7 - Waikawau Boat Ramp (24km north of Thames). 14

Figure 8 - Boat trailers at Waikawau Boat Ramp Sunday 13 November 2016 15

Figure 9 - Recreational Fishing effort 15

Figure 10 - Portion of Chart NZ533 showing the Project Area 17 Figure 11 - Enlargement of portion of Chart NZ533 showing the Project 17 Area Figure 12 - Diagram indicating the suggested marking of the proposed 21 marine farm

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Author was commissioned to undertake an assessment of the navigation and safety aspects of a proposed marine farm in the Western Firth of Thames.

The assessment involved a desk study of available resources, discussions with various officers and individuals and a visit to the eastern side of the Firth of Thames to view recreational fishing vessel traffic at boat ramps.

The assessment has been undertaken in line with the NZ Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code. The Author notes that while the Code is not strictly applicable to the area under consideration, the principles of the Code should be taken into consideration when assessing the Project.

The effects of the proposed marine farm on vessel traffic are assessed. The Author notes that there is extremely little marine traffic in the area although a large number of recreational fishing boats are launched from ramps on the eastern side of the Firth of Thames. These boats are attracted to the area by the existing marine farms, fishing in and around the structures where the fish congregate. The proposed marine farm would likewise attract recreational fishers, possibly launching from the western side of the Firth of Thames.

The Author has provided guidance - in accordance with appropriate guidelines - on how the proposed marine farm could be marked.

The Author assesses that the proposed marine farm will not be a significant maritime hazard.

Note: References quoted are listed at Appendix A

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 4

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview This assessment has been commissioned by Richard Turner, Mitchell Daysh Ltd, on behalf of the Western Firth Marine Farming Consortium.

The Consortium proposes to establish a marine farm in the Western Firth of Thames. The Consortium has requested a maritime navigation assessment to support a resource consent application for the proposed marine farm. This assessment has been undertaken in line with the New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code (PHSC - Reference 1) and the Guidelines thereto.

In this report the following abbreviated terms are used:

 The Author – Larry Robbins OBE FNI  The Consortium – Western Firth Consortium  The Council – Auckland Council  The WRC – Waikato Regional Council  The Project – the development of a marine farm in the Western Firth of Thames  The Code – New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code (PHSC)  An Assessment – a Port and Harbours Safety Code Assessment in terms of the New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code.

1.2 Objectives of the Study This study has been commissioned to review the Consortium’s proposal from a navigational and maritime safety aspect and to review the requirements of the Code.

1.3 Qualifications & Experience Relevant to this Study. This study was undertaken by Larry Robbins whose relevant maritime experience is as follows:  British Merchant Navy (5 years).  Royal New Zealand Navy (26 years). Seaman officer, rising to rank of commander in the Hydrographic Surveying Service of the RNZN and the position of Hydrographer RNZN. Commanded survey motor launches and inshore survey craft (total 3 years) and the survey ship HMNZS MONOWAI (4½ years) undertaking surveys around New Zealand and the South Pacific in support of national charting programmes. In the period 1976-1978 was engaged in surveys in the Firth of Thames and Coromandel Harbour area. These surveys form part of the current navigational charts of the area (Reference 6)  Volunteer service as deck officer with Mercy Ships aboard MV AFRICA MERCY.

The Author holds the following relevant qualifications:  Category A qualification as Hydrographic Surveyor recognised by the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) – the highest such qualification attainable internationally.  RNZN Certificate as Charge Hydrographic Surveyor (H0).  RNZN Command Qualification (First Class).  Current Certificate as Inshore Launch Master (ILM)  Second Mates Certificate of Competency (Current seagoing certificate STCW II-I renewed in 2012)

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 5

The Author is a member of the following maritime-based organisations:  Australasian Hydrographic Society (Member Emeritus)  Nautical Institute (Fellow)  NZ Company of Master Mariners (Member)

1.4 Methodology The Author met with, or discussed the project with, a number of people. Refer to the list at Appendix C. In addition to those listed, a number of others provided links or contacts whilst not being able to assist directly.

The Author visited the Firth of Thames as part of this study to ascertain likely vessel traffic at boat ramps in the area.

2.0 THE PROJECT 2.1 Background and Aims of the Project The Consortium seeks to construct a marine farm in the Western Firth of Thames. The total area of the marine farm is 664 hectares, of which the total farmed area is 470 hectares.

2.2 Location of the Project.

Figure 1 – Location Diagram (Chart NZ533)

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 6

The proposed farm is situated in the western part of the northern Firth of Thames in depths ranging from approximately 13 to 21 metres at Chart Datum (Lowest Astronomical Tide)1 . The location is at the south-eastern extremity of the Council Boundary close to the western boundary of the area administered by Waikato Regional Council (Environment Waikato).

An existing marine farm lies to off Wilsons Bay to the east of the Project area within the area administered by the WRC as shown on Chart NZ533 (Reference 6)

3.0 PORT & HARBOUR RISK ASSESSMENT 3.1 Introduction Marine Consultant, Captain Jim Varney, in commenting upon a marina development proposal being put forward by Waiheke Marinas Ltd to the Auckland Council2 commented: “The NZ Port & Harbour Marine Safety Code was published on the 28th April 2004. The Code serves as a framework for the preparation of safety management systems by Regional Councils. The aim is to establish a system covering all marine operations in ports and harbours which ensures that risks are both tolerable and as low as reasonably practicable.

The Code is not law. It is an assessment of legal responsibilities under existing law applicable to the operation of NZ ports and harbours. It is also an assessment of where those responsibilities lie and is an agreed interpretation of NZ law and a statement of good practice.

While compliance is not mandatory, prudent participants in the system will be able to use compliance with the Code to demonstrate they have taken all reasonable steps to ensure safe marine operations in ports and harbours.

While the Minister of Transport is ultimately responsible for safety at reasonable cost within the NZ maritime system, Maritime NZ is the Authority which has the statutory function of promoting a safe maritime environment and as such is empowered to review the maritime safety systems produced by the Regional Councils, in conjunction with major stake holders …

It was always recognized that the implementation of the code throughout NZ would be achieved in stages, as each Region submitted their Code for approval. The ARC received approval for their Risk Assessment of Operations in all Regions on the 22nd June 2007. The culmination of something like 4 years work. Auckland being one the first Port Companies and Regional Authority’s [sic] who were already working towards stricter standards of compliance having regard to work undertaken by the IMO and other International bodies in this field, before the final draft of the NZ Code was published in April of 2004. ”

3.2 Harbours and Ports The NZ Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code aims inter alia “to promote good practice in the conduct of safe marine operations in ports and harbours.”3 [Author’s emphasis].

1 Lowest Astronomical Tide (normally abbreviated to LAT) is defined by the International Hydrographic Organisation thus: “the lowest tide level which can be predicted to occur under average meteorological conditions and under any combination of astronomical conditions.“ http://hd.iho.int/en/index.php/lowest_astronomical_tide. It is usually the level to which soundings on charts are reduced (Chart Datum) 2 Proposed Marina Matiatia Bay Navigational and Safety Report – Captain Jim Varney, Marine Consultant, 1 February 2011. Paragraphs 2 and 3 (part) 3 Reference 1, page 5. Introduction.

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 7

A ‘Harbour’ is defined, inter alia, as including “any other coastal or inland waters that a regional council determines are a harbour for the purposes of this Code in accordance with a Code application assessment.”

The Firth of Thames has not been declared to be “a harbour”. The area under consideration does not, therefore, fall within the Code’s definition of a harbour4. As the area is not under the control of a port company, the area does not meet the definition of “a port” and is unlikely to ever do so.

Strictly speaking, the NZ Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code would not seem to apply to the area under consideration. However, in discussions with Mr Christiaan Moss, Deputy Harbourmaster Auckland, it was indicated that in the event of an accident or incident in the area, the principles of the code would be applied.

Notwithstanding that the area technically falls outside of the scope of the Code, an assessment in line with the Code and a detailed study of the “possible hazards and issues that arise …” was included as part of the project brief. The Author has thus provided such assessment and comment. This assessment is tabulated at Appendix E and some comment is provided in the following paragraphs of this text.

In formulating the assessment the Author notes the statement in the guidelines (Reference 2) that “A risk assessment defines the risks”5 (as compared to a safety management system which manages the risks.) Accordingly it is strictly outside of the formal assessment process to propose a system of marking the reefs for navigational purposes, although as requested, an outline comment/suggestion is included.

3.3 Navigation Safety Bylaw The Author has also considered relevant provisions of the Auckland Council Navigation Safety Bylaw6 in this assessment.

The Bylaw was updated in 2014 and applies to all navigable waters in the Auckland Region. It thus applies in the portion of the northern Firth of Thames contained within the Council’s area although this locality is not mentioned specifically.

The proposed marine farm is situated within the Council area and thus the Auckland Council Navigation Safety Bylaw applies to the area in which the proposed marine farm is situated.

The area is at the SE corner of the Auckland Council area and thus abuts the area under the control of the WRC. The Waikato Regional Council Navigation Safety Bylaw (2013 – Reference 4) has also been consulted. The WRC Bylaw contains some provisions relating to specific parts of the WRC marine area but none covering the general locality of the proposed or existing marine farms.

Conceivably, as the proposed marine farm abuts the boundary between Auckland and WRC areas, the construction activity of the proposed farm may intrude slightly into the

4 Reference 1, page 5. Introduction. 5 Reference 2 page 6. 6 Reference 3

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 8

WRC area. It will thus be necessary to ensure adequate liaison with and between the relevant local authorities and Harbourmasters.

3.4 Pilotage Area Maritime Rule 90 (issued by the Minister of Transport) defines the Auckland Pilotage Area.7 The easternmost limit lies within the Hauraki Gulf itself. There is no defined Pilotage Area within the area under the authority of the WRC. The area under consideration for the proposed marine farm does not fall within any defined pilotage area.

3.5 Vessel Traffic in the Firth of Thames There appears to be little available quantitative data about vessel traffic in the Firth of Thames area under consideration. The Author spoke with various persons and officers in their official capacity and/or with local knowledge. The Seasketch website8 was consulted and this largely bears out the information and opinions gleaned in the various discussions.

Large Commercial Vessels (vessels over 500 grt) The Sailing Directions (or ‘Pilot’) for the area (Reference 5) indicate that routes used by large commercial vessels lie well to the north of the proposed marine farm, running generally from the entrance to Waitemata Harbour north-eastwards to the Colville Channel and northwards towards North Cape.

A conversation with Ms Nevenka Erceg, the Duty Officer in the Auckland Harbour Control Office, confirmed this to be the case. Ms Erceg indicated that she knew of no instance where a large commercial vessel had ventured, or needed to proceed, towards the area under consideration for the proposed marine farm - either on passage or to anchor.

Discussions with Commander Oomen of the RNZN’s Marine Trade Operations branch – the organisation concerned with monitoring and controlling merchant shipping for Defence Purposes - confirmed these statements. Although vessels are tracked in real time by the NZ Defence Force National Maritime Command Centre using AIS 9 data, no database of historical merchant vessel tracks and movements is presently maintained by the Navy.

A commercial company, Marico Marine, whose local office is in Wellington, has the capability of monitoring and analysing AIS data but was not approached as part of

7 Maritime Rule 90 applies to vessels over 500 gross tons (except for warships) and defines the pilotage area thus: “The area of tidal waters inside a straight line drawn from the northern extreme of the eastern head of the Tamaki River to the southern extreme of Park Point (Te Roreomaiaea); then by the high water mark of ordinary spring tide to the northern extreme of the western entrance to Owhanake Bay; then by a straight line to the south-western most point of Rakino Island; then by a straight line from the northernmost point of Rakino Island to Shearer Rock, then by a straight line to the southernwest [sic] extreme of Tiritiri Matangi Island, then by a straight line to the southeastern extreme of Whangaparaoa Peninsula.” 8 http://www.seasketch.org/#projecthomepage/52322dd05d3e2c665a00d119 9 The Automatic Identification System (AIS) is an automatic tracking system used on ships and by vessel traffic services (VTS) for identifying and locating vessels by electronically exchanging data (for example speed, heading, destination and the ship’s dimensions). with other nearby ships, AIS base stations, and satellites. (Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_identification_system) . The Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention requires that all internationally trading vessels with a gross tonnage greater than 300, all cargo ships with a gross tonnage greater than 500 and all passenger ships, regardless of size, are required to carry AIS transponders. Other vessels are not required to carry AIS transponders, although some do for ease of navigation. AIS is increasingly used by recreational vessels. NZ warships also have the equipment onboard but its operation is determined by the tactical situation and it is not operated continuously.

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 9

this study. The company was engaged, however, to derive the shipping and navigation data used in the SeaSketch overlays (see following illustrations).

A web-based system (www.marinetraffic.com) allows limited monitoring of AIS data in real-time. During the course of the study this website was used to view activity in the SE Hauraki Gulf and Firth of Thames area on a number of random occasions. No vessel movements were observed.

Figure 2 is “a representative snapshot of ‘shipping traffic density’ in the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park using real-time tracking information“ taken from the SeaSketch website derived from a 3 month survey by Marico Marine (15 October 2011 to 15 January 2012) The Project area is approximately in the centre of the picture and a partly obscured portion of the boundary limits between Auckland and Waikato Regional Councils can be seen . Main shipping routes are shown by the blue lines at the top of the picture and are presumed to be the routes taken by ferries serving the Coromandel/Auckland route. The buff coloured shaded area indicates shipping traffic of “low density” to/from the Thames/Waihou River area though no AIS data appears to have been acquired during the period of the survey.

By way of comparison, Figure 3 is also taken from the SeaSketch overlays and shows the main vessel tracks in the wider area.

Figure 2 Shipping Traffic overlay. Crown copyright : Department of Conservation Te Papa Atawhai [2012]

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 10

Figure 3

The main vessel tracks in the wider area. Crown copyright: Department of Conservation Te Papa Atawhai [2012]

Other Commercial Vessels (Vessels under 500grt) A regular ferry service exists between Auckland and Coromandel. The blue lines shown in Figure 2 appear to show the tracks of these vessels, possibly along with some recreational vessels cruising to Coromandel/Te Kouma. These tracks are confined to areas well north of the proposed marine farm.

McCallum Bros Ltd10 operate a variety of small commercial vessels, principally tug and barge traffic. The Marine Operations Manager advises that at least one trip per week (increasing to 2 or 3 per week in summer months) is made to a landing in the Waihou River just short of the Kopu Bridge carrying sand from Pakiri Beach in the self-propelled barge. Cargoes of machinery, trucks and grey metal may also be carried to the landing from Auckland. Their vessels will also make transit from Kopu Landing to Great Barrier Island. During the construction of the Kopu Bridge marine traffic increased. The buff coloured shaded areas in Figure 2 are most likely reflective of this traffic.

The McCallum vessels generally transit ‘more or less’ up the middle of the Firth and if on passage to or from Auckland will use the southerly (Sandspit) passage into the Waiheke Channel or pass to the north of Waiheke. They consider the existing marine farms to be “well charted and buoyed” and that they “do not present a major navigational difficulty.“

Commercial Fishing Vessels Commercial fishing in the Firth of Thames is mainly carried out from small fishing dorys ranging from 5 to 7 metres in length. All of these fishing dorys are trailer boats which launch from local boat ramps along the Thames Coast, occasionally launching from the Kaiaua side of the Firth of Thames when there is a strong westerly wind.

10 http://www.mccallumbros.co.nz/

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 11

The dorys fish using set netting methods for flounder or rig. One contact suggested that the number of commercial fishers in the area “has reduced dramatically in the last 10 years.”

Some fishing dorys launch out of the Kopu and Piako Rivers but they tend to remain in the southern part of the Firth away from the proposed marine farms.

The Author visited Thames over the weekend of 12/13 November 2016. A NZ registered long-line vessel, KIM OCEAN (21 metres in length), was located at the wharf but although the Author visited on 3 subsequent occasions, the vessel was unmanned so the crew could not be interviewed. Inspection of the MarineTraffic AIS records11 for the vessel indicate that it fishes over a wide area, although no tracks in the Firth of Thames were shown.

Figure 4

Longline vessel KIM OCEAN at the wharf in Thames

Naval Vessels Naval vessels may conceivably venture into the area on training exercises although contacts indicated that the Navy focusses training in the Hauraki Gulf itself. The RNZN may use the Firth of Thames for navigation training but will normally stay north of the line between Ruthe Passage and Te Kouma Harbour12. Navigation training in this area would normally take place “in and amongst the Motukawao group of Islands as well as those in the vicinity of Goat Island.”13 Ruthe passage and Sandspit Passage may be used for the more advanced Frigate Navigation Officer (FNO) courses although no FNO course has been run for the last few years. These passages are not suitable for lower level navigation training.

11 The latest AIS data available on the MarineTraffic website is dated 15 September 2016 when the vessel was at Opua. 12 The Ruthe Passage leads between Ponui (Chamberlins) Island and Rotorua Island, approximately 13 nautical miles NW of the proposed marine farm; Te Kouma lies approximately 11 nautical miles NNE of the proposed marine farm. Refer to Figure 1 13 Discussion with Mr D Hedgeley. These islands are situated to the north of Coromandel Harbour and north of the border of Figure1.

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 12

Figure 5

Screenshot from www.MarineTraffic.com showing tracks of HMNZS HAWEA on navigation training in the Hauraki Gulf 31 October – 1 November 2016.

Two other RNZN Patrol craft were observed undertaking similar training at the same time.

Recreational Vessels Various publications prepared for yachtsmen and ‘boaties’ have been consulted. These are listed as References at Appendix A.

In summary, none of the publications recommend the Firth of Thames as being attractive for small-craft cruising and indeed there is scant mention of the Firth in such guides.

Informal discussions were held with yachtsmen who cruise in the Hauraki Gulf area. They indicated that if venturing to the east of Waiheke Island they would generally prefer the Ruthe Passage to the more southerly and narrower Sandspit Passage and would generally cruise over to Te Kouma or Coromandel Harbour areas where the scenery is more attractive and where the anchorages are better.14

There are a number of boat ramps giving access into the Firth of Thames as shown on chart NZ533 and other references including the Seasketch website. These are well-used by trailer boats, generally for those going fishing. The ramps are shown in Figure 6.

14 From the NIWA/MPI data provided by Mr Hartill the Author selected the records between latitudes 36°51’ S and 37°12’ S and longitudes 175°15’ E and 175° 31’ E. In this area, on 50 days, 1996 vessels were observed. Of these 3 (<1%) are described as ‘Charter’, ‘Kayak’ 14 (1%) ‘Launch’ (1%) ‘Trailer Boat’ 1961 (98%) ‘Yacht’ 2 (<1%).

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 13

T h e Figure 6

W Boat Ramps (Blue R symbol) in the Firth of C Thames area.

Source: SeaSketch H website a r b o u r m a s t The WRC Harbourmaster for the Coromandel area advised that “around 200-300” vessel movements were typically undertaken by recreational fishing vessels from boat ramps in the Firth of Thames area over a weekend. This number was also provided independently by the editor of Professional Skipper magazine although neither could provide definitive data.

The Author visited the area over a weekend. The most popular boat ramp is at Waikawau. On a cold and blustery Saturday afternoon at half tide (rising) around a dozen trailers were parked at the ramp and boats were observed coming and going. On a subsequent visit next morning 2 hours before low-water around two dozen trailers were in the car park. The Author spoke with the Ramp Warden who indicated that at least 100 vessels had launched at the ramp over the previous Labour Weekend. The website of the Waikawau Boat Ramp Society states that “The ramp is used by up to 400 boats a day over the summer holidays …”15

Figure 7 Waikawau Boat Ramp (24km north of Thames). Photograph taken from the Waikawau Boat Ramp Society website http://www.waikawauboatramp.co.nz/

15 http://www.waikawauboatramp.co.nz/

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 14

Figure 8 Boat trailers at Waikawau Boat Ramp Sunday 13 November 2016 (Author’s photograph)

Mr Bruce Hartill, Fisheries Scientist NIWA, provided some tabulated data from a survey undertaken on behalf of the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) – in 2011/2012. This is essentially a snapshot of activity around noon on the survey days.16 He felt that that the estimates provided by the Harbourmaster were “probable”.

All those consulted on this point indicated that almost all of the recreational fishers actually fished within and around the farms off Wilsons Bay. Fish are attracted to, and feed around the mussel farms. This is borne out by the ‘Recreational Fishing Effort’ overlay from Seasketch which is reproduced in Figure 9, the large orange/yellow circular areas corresponding approximately to the position of the existing marine farms. The overlay is derived from the data compiled in Mr Hartill’s surveys October 2011- September 2012.

Mr Hartill noted that the existing farms are mussel farms which attract recreational fishermen as the farms are a popular feeding ground for various fish species.

Figure 9 Recreational Fishing effort (from SeaSketch website)

16 ibid

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 15

Other Vessels The Author spoke to Captain Paul Leppington – formerly Master of the sail training vessel SPIRIT OF NEW ZEALAND and currently navigation lecturer at the NZ Maritime School in Auckland. Captain Leppington advised that he could not recall any occasion when the vessel had ventured into the general area of the proposed marine farm and suggested that other parts of the local area were more attractive and interesting and provided better anchorages than the Firth of Thames.

3.6 Existing Navigational Hazards and Routes The navigational chart of the area is NZ 533 “Firth of Thames” (Reference 6). The current edition17 was published on a scale of 1:100,000 at latitude 36° by Land Information New Zealand in 1999.

The area in which the proposed marine farm is located was last surveyed by the Royal NZ Navy (HMNZ Ships TAKAPU and TARAPUNGA) in 1978 with the area immediately to the north surveyed two years earlier. The Author was involved in the 1978 survey in command of HMNZS TAKAPU.

Since publication of the current edition of the chart, a number of “small corrections” have been made to the chart by Notice to Mariners to keep it updated. These include notices adding the limits of the marine farms off Wilsons Bay and associated buoyage. None of the corrections affect the area under consideration. There are no temporary or preliminary notices currently affecting this chart.

The chart does not show any prohibited anchorages, fish farms, outfalls or cables in the area of the proposed marine farm development. The bottom is shown as being of soft mud (“soM”) and charted depths range from around 13 metres to around 21 metres at Chart Datum.

A ‘Tidal Diamond’ is charted around 1.6 nautical miles to the north of the NW extremity of the Project area. This indicates that the flood tide runs generally parallel to the coast at up to 0.9 knots at spring tides with the ebb also parallel to the coast at up to 0.8 knots. To the south of the project area current arrows indicate flows in a more SE/NW direction of up to 1.5 knots.

The nearest navigational dangers are the buoy marking the SW corner of the existing marine farm off Wilsons Bay which is a little over 2.6 nautical miles (about 4800 metres) NW from the nearest point of the boundary of the proposed marine farm, and the existing small marine farm off Waimangu Point which is around 2 nautical miles (approximately 3700 metres) almost due west from the NW point of the proposed marine farm. Refer to Figures 10 and 11.

A mooring zone for recreational and small commercial vessels is located at Windy Point about 7 nautical miles SE of the proposed marine farm. The most likely route between Windy Point and the Sandspit or Ruthe Passages would generally lead between the existing and proposed marine farms. When the Author visited the area no vessels were observed at the mooring zone.

17 As at 1 November 2016

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 16

Figure 10 Portion of Chart NZ533 showing the Project Area (manually plotted by the Author using coordinates at Appendix C). Note the small marine farm off Waimangu Point almost due west of the NW extremity of the Project Area and the existing marine farms off Wilsons Bay

Figure 11 Enlargement of portion of Chart NZ533 showing the Project Area (manually plotted by the Author). Note the buoys marking the marine farm off Wilsons Bay to the NE of the Project Area

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 17

The publication Guidelines for Aquaculture Management Areas and Marine Farms published by Maritime New Zealand dated 200518 indicates (section 5.2.5) that offshore marine farms should not be located, as a minimum, within 1000 metres (0.54 nautical miles) of any recognised navigational route.

The Author noted reference to a ‘Navigation Route to Windy Pt’ on some diagrams for previous spat-catching consent applications that were lodged around 2001 – 2003. However, discussions with the WRC Coromandel Harbourmaster and the Auckland Council Deputy Harbourmaster indicate that there are no recognised or designated navigational tracks or routes in the Firth of Thames.

3.7 Assessment In the Author’s opinion, fishing vessels and small commercial vessels such as those operated by McCallum Bros Ltd transiting to the Waihou River and other points in the southern Firth of Thames would not be unduly adversely affected by the proposed marine farm. Additional steaming distances to avoid the proposed marine farm would be minimal.

At its narrowest point the passage between the existing and proposed marine farms would be a little over 2.6 nautical miles width, and the navigational tracks they are likely to employ will generally lead between the existing and proposed marine farms. The courses past the marine farms would be more or less in line with the currents, although across the prevailing wind direction.

The Author considers it extremely unlikely that the proposed marine farm will prove to be a hazard to merchant vessels since large commercial vessels do not come in to the general area.

The proposed marine farm is very unlikely to prove hazardous to naval vessels.

The Author notes that the area is not generally frequented by sailing vessels or launches although the occasional yacht ventures to Thames.

Recreational fishing boats which are generally launched from ramps on the eastern side of the Firth of Thames currently congregate in and around the existing mussel farms off Wilsons Bay. These boats are attracted to the area in and around the existing marine farm where the fish congregate. The proposed marine farm would likewise attract recreational fishers, possibly launching from the western side of the Firth of Thames.

Refer to Appendix E for the formal assessment in line with the New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code.

18 Reference 16

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 18

4.0 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Hazards posed by proposed marine farm As noted earlier, large merchant vessels do not frequent the area. As shown in the assessment matrices, a mechanical failure in a merchant vessel off the northern part of the Firth of Thames could conceivably, in northerly winds19, cause the vessel to drift down the Firth. Depths from the shipping lane southwards decrease from around 40 metres. The bottom is shown as being Mud (M) Mud and broken Shells (MbkSh) or sand (MS). These bottoms generally provide good to reasonable holding for an anchor. There are no charted submarine cables. Any merchant vessel should be able to anchor safely in mud in such depths. The presence of the farms will, in this circumstance, present no more of a risk than the natural features or existing farms in the area.

Similar statements and considerations to those above can be made in respect of naval vessels, although for the most part naval vessels are generally smaller and of shallower draft. Any disabled naval vessel should be able to anchor safely before coming into contact with the Project structure. It is probable that naval vessels would avoid the area under normal circumstances unless choosing to use the farms as part of navigation training – for example to demonstrate the system of buoyage.

As noted previously, the existing marine farms attract considerable recreational fishing traffic. Provided that the farms are appropriately marked and charted, the proposed farm, in itself, should propose no greater hazard to competent navigators than any other similar structure.

The National Hydrographic Authority, responsible for maintaining and publishing navigational charts, is Land Information New Zealand (LINZ). Liaison will be required with LINZ and the Auckland Harbourmaster to ensure that they are advised of the construction so that the necessary Notices to Mariners (preliminary, temporary and permanent) are promulgated along with any appropriate amendments to the chart when the Project is completed.

4.2 Navigational Marks – Proposed Marine Farm The Author suggests that there is no “right” way to mark a marine farm system such as is proposed, and maritime experts may not agree on the most appropriate way of marking the farm. Guidance is provided in the booklet Guidelines for Aquaculture Management Areas and Marine Farms published by Maritime New Zealand dated 2005.20

Refer to Appendix D for information and general comment on systems of beaconage and buoyage used in New Zealand.

A decision will need to be made as a balance between:

 visibility of navigation marks  simplicity - marks should be such as to enable an instinctive decision to be made about which side to pass  identifiable - navigation marks should be instinctively identifiable in respect of

19 The New Zealand Pilot (Reference 5) indicates that the prevailing wind is in the southern semi-circle (ie direction E–S- W) for the majority of the year (on average around 65%) with the majority of the wind blowing from SE-S-SW 20 Reference 16

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 19

type, colour etc  maintenance cost – increasing complexity and number of marks implies increased maintenance cost

Any proposed scheme of buoyage will need to be supported by the Harbourmaster and approved by Maritime New Zealand in accordance with the Guidelines.

In addition to standard navigational marks, the Guidelines require additional floats, lights and buoys in various parts of the structure. As the proposed farm is more than 200 metres offshore, section 6.3 of the Guidelines is applicable.

The existing farms at Wilsons Bay are marked using the cardinal system in place of Special Marks as allowed by the Guidelines. Additionally, Special Marks are charted to the North-West and South-East. The Author presumes, but has not been able to verify, that other buoys floats etc are generally in accord with the Guidelines but notes that the farm was apparently established before these guidelines were published.

The Special Marks at the Wilsons Bay farm(s) are located at a distance to the NW and SE approximating to the length of the farms themselves (ie the farms are about 3 nautical miles long and the Special Marks are located about 3 miles to the NW/SE of the nearest edge of the marked area). The Marks are positioned approximately in line with the centre- line of the farms.

The rationale for the addition of outlying Special Marks in this case is uncertain and the Author suggests that from a navigational point of view they are superfluous. Presumably they were intended to be advance warning of the presence of the farms. The farms were established before the present Coromandel Harbourmaster was in office and the Author has been unable to locate any definitive information about these marks. The Author could not see the southern-most Special Mark from the shore during his visit to the area and the boat ramp warden could not confirm whether the buoy still exists as, along with most other ramp users, his boating is confined to fishing around the farms and he has “never ventured that far south”.

The use of the Cardinal System does not require any knowledge about the direction of buoyage which, in the case of the Firth of Thames could be uncertain. The Author suggests that the Cardinal System, rather than Special Marks should be employed to mark the corners of the proposed marine farm21. This would accord with the marking of the existing farms.

As the farms will be a reasonable distance apart, the Author suggests that the present and existing farms can be marked independently of the other – ie that the gap between the farms does not actually constitute a “channel”.

The existing and proposed farms are sufficiently distant (2.6 nautical miles at closest point) that any new marks are unlikely to be confused with the existing ones, but careful

21 “For the purpose of navigation and safety, harbourmasters may require Cardinal marks to be used in addition to special marks mentioned in 6.3.3. They shall be placed outside the intended site to ensure that the directions they provide to mariners is most appropriate to provide for safe navigation near the site. Should harbourmaster decide a cardinal mark is to be positioned at a corner of the site, then it should replace the special mark required for that corner. All cardinal marks’ requirement and positioning is to be approved by Maritime New Zealand. “ Reference 14. Paragraph 6.3.3

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 20

attention to the way in which the buoys are lit will assist to avoid any confusion at night.

The Author suggests that the proposed farm should be marked by a Cardinal Mark positioned at each of the corners of the ‘triangle’ as shown in Figure 12. This was discussed with Captain Leppington who agreed that it would be a simple and sensible way to mark the proposed marine farm.

Figure 12 Diagram indicating the suggested marking of the proposed marine farm

The south side of the area is almost 2 miles (3700m) long so per the Guidelines (paragraph 6.3.4) the Marks must be “supplemented with additional special marks showing light at night, placed along the perimeter of the site so that the distance between any marks (corner or perimeter) is no greater than 1/2 nautical mile. The light on special (perimeter) marks must have the following characteristic: (i) The light must be yellow and flash 5 times every 20 seconds. (ii) The light must be at least 1 metre above water level. (iii) Have intensity as specified in the technical specifications at the end of this section so as to be visible at a minimum range of 1 nautical mile. “

The Author suggests that a Special Mark displaced to the north is not necessary, though there could be a case for one to be sited about 2 nautical miles south of the eastern corner to give advance warning to vessels approaching from the SE. However, this may be seen as ‘overkill’ given (a) the extremely low levels of maritime traffic (b) that such traffic will generally have good local knowledge and (c) that most vessels (other perhaps than trailer boats) will have access to GPS and/or radar.

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 21

5.0 CONSTRUCTION OF THE FARM 5.1 Precautions during Construction The nature of the seabed indicates that there should be few problems in mooring or anchoring barge(s) as necessary during the construction phase.

Perhaps the greatest risk to the environment would occur if refuelling operations were conducted with the barge on station. In any case, any instructions from the Harbourmaster (noting earlier comment about the possible need to liaise with both Auckland and WRC Harbourmasters) relating to refuelling22 must be complied with, but it is suggested that a specific Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan should be developed for the construction period, and should include:  Ensuring that all equipment is maintained in good mechanical condition  A detailed environmental contingency plan to be developed and followed  Strict compliance with Harbourmaster’s operating instructions and Maritime Protection Rules23  A ban on all refuelling operations on-site  Frequent inspection of equipment for (e.g.) hydraulic leaks etc  Carriage of equipment (such as absorbent material) to cope with minor oil spills

5.2 Navigation warnings etc during construction During construction the barge and attendant/associated vessels will restrict navigation. Any risks can be mitigated by the issuing of navigation warnings and by sensible precautions onboard. The following steps are suggested:  Construction area to be marked by buoys  Land Information New Zealand to be requested to issue a Temporary Notice to Mariners warning of the construction operation, exclusion area etc  Appropriate warning signals (in accordance with the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea supplemented by flag signals in accordance with the International Code of Signals) to be exhibited by the barge and attendant vessels  A lookout and listening watch on VHF Channel 16 to be maintained on the barge or a designated attendant vessel when on station to warn off any vessels approaching too close to the area  The barge to be fully lit during the hours of darkness

6.0 CONCLUSIONS 6.1 Conclusions  In the Author’s opinion, strictly speaking, the New Zealand Ports and Harbour Marine Code (the Code) does not apply to the proposed marine farm in the Western Firth of Thames  According to the Auckland Harbourmaster’s office the area is one to which the Code does not strictly apply - though in the event of an accident, the principles of the Code would be applied.  Notwithstanding the preceding points, an outline assessment has been made, in line with the Code, as required to allow an application for Resource Consent to be submitted.  Under normal circumstances the farm will not prove a hindrance to naval and large commercial vessels as these do not generally use or visit the area.

22 Navigation Safety Bylaw 2014 and Controls (Reference 3) paragraph 52 23 ibid

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 22

 Provided it is properly marked, the proposed marine farm should not prove to be a significant hazard to small commercial vessels or recreational users – indeed it may prove to be an attraction to recreational fishermen from the western side of the Firth of Thames  Although the Author has taken a subjective, but reasonably strict application of the criteria in formulating the matrix, overall scores are reasonably low, primarily due to the low level of traffic in the area (and hence the cost to property, personnel and the environment in the event of any mishap)

APPENDICES A. References B. Consultations and Discussions C. Limits of the Proposed Marine Farm D. Navigational Marks - General E. Assessment in line with the New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code.

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 23

APPENDIX A.

References

1. NEW ZEALAND PORT AND HARBOUR MARINE SAFETY CODE Second Edition © Maritime New Zealand 2016 (downloaded from the Maritime New Zealand website https://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/commercial/documents/NZ-port- harbour-marine-safety-code.pdf )

2. GUIDELINES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR RISK ASSESSMENT AND SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN NEW ZEALAND © Maritime Safety Authority 2004 (downloaded from the Maritime New Zealand website http://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/commercial/ports-and- harbours/documents/Port-harbour-risk-assessment.pdf )

3. NAVIGATION SAFETY BYLAW 2014 AND CONTROLS - Ture ā-Rohe Urungi Āhuru 2014 - as at 31 July 2014 (downloaded from Auckland Council website: http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/licencesregulations/Bylaws/Document s/navsafetybylawcontrols2014.pdf )

4. WAIKATO REGIONAL COUNCIL NAVIGATION SAFETY BYLAW - operative on 1 July 2013 (downloaded from Waikato Regional Council website: http://www.waikatoregion.govt.nz/PageFiles/6773/Nav_Safety_2013_bylaw_web .pdf )

5. NEW ZEALAND PILOT, NP51, Eighteenth Edition 2010. Published by the UK Hydrographic Office, Taunton UK. ISBN 978-0-707-74238-0

6. Chart NZ533. Published October 1978 by the Hydrographer RNZN. New Edition December 1999 published under the authority of Land Information New Zealand. Corrected to 28 October 2016.

7. Maritime Rule 90. Maritime New Zealand, Consolidated version 1 April 2015. Downloaded from http://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/rules/part-90/Part90- maritime-rule.pdf

8. NEW ZEALAND’S HAURAKI GULF - re-titled fourth edition of the Hauraki Gulf Boaties Atlas - 2011. David Thatcher ISBN 978-1877-197-42-0 Published by Captain Teach Press

9. RECREATIONAL BOATING GUIDES – Auckland to Kawau Island. Published by David Bateman Ltd 2003. ISBN 1 86953 546-4

10. COASTAL CRUISING HANDBOOK – Eleventh Edition. Royal Akarana Yacht Club 2012. ISBN 978-0-473-15792-0

11. CRUISING in New Zealand waters from The North Cape to Tauranga. G R Paul. The Pegasus Press 1961.

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 24

12. CRUISING NEW ZEALAND. Mike Pigneguy, Mark Airey. Spot X Publications 2009. ISBN 1-877374-69-5

13. WILLIAM OWEN’S HAURAKI GULF. William Owen (4th Edition, revised by Penny Owen) . David Bateman Ltd 2010. ISBN 978-1-86953-750-0

14. NEW ZEALAND’S SYSTEM OF BUOYS AND BEACONS. Maritime New Zealand https://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/about/documents/New-Zealand-system-of- buoys-and-beacons.pdf

15. Regional Coastal Plan (Waikato Regional Council). On-line version. http://www.waikatoregion.govt.nz/Council/Policy-and-plans/Rules-and- regulation/Regional-Coastal-Plan/Regional-Coastal-Plan/

16. Guidelines for Aquaculture Management Areas and Marine Farms. Maritime New Zealand, December 2005. https://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/commercial/ports-and- harbours/documents/Guideline-for-Aquaculture-Management-areas-and-Marine- Farms.pdf

17. Sea Change - Tai Timu Tai Pari - Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan http://www.seasketch.org/#projecthomepage/52322dd05d3e2c665a00d119

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 25

APPENDIX B

Consultations and Discussions

The Author acknowledges the assistance of the following persons who were consulted during the course of this study. A number of others provided contacts, comment or links:

Commander Michael Oomen VRD RNZNVR - Commander, Maritime Trade Operations, Royal New Zealand Navy

Mr Stuart Crawley - Harbourmaster Coromandel, Waikato Regional Council

Duty Officer - Auckland Harbourmaster’s office

Mr Sietse Bouma – Team Leader Nautical Environmental Strategy, Auckland Council

Mr Alan Moore – Team Leader Coastal, Resource Consents Dept, Auckland Council

Mr Christiaan Moss - Deputy Harbourmaster Auckland Council

Commander D.N Hedgley FNI RNZN (Rtd) - Senior Navigation Instructor, Navigation Training Centre, Royal New Zealand Navy

Mr Keith Ingram – Editor Professional Skipper Magazine

Ms Nevenka Erceg – Duty Officer, Port Control Office, Ports of Auckland

Mr James Aston – Maritime Operations Manager, McCallum Bros Ltd

Mr Richard Lough – Nautical Advisor, Maritime New Zealand

Ms Nicole Botherwell – Maritime Services, Environment Waikato

Mr Bruce Hartill – Fisheries Scientist, NIWA

Captain Paul Leppington – Navigation Lecturer NZ Maritime School. Formerly Senior Master, STV SPIRIT OF NEW ZEALAND

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 26

APPENDIX C

Limits of the Proposed Marine Farm

For the purposes of plotting the limits of the proposed farm onto the navigational chart, the following coordinates were used.

NZTM data is from a plan prepared by Draughting Plus Ltd dated 20 October 2016.

Conversion was undertaken utilising an online tool on the Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) website www.linz.govt.nz and checked using a tool on the NIWA website http://hirds.niwa.co.nz . Conversion errors are less than 2 metres and within the plottable accuracy on the paper chart.

Point NZTM2000 WGS84 pt1 1808996.94 E 5900020.76 N 37 01.36663 S 175 20.96573 E pt2 1808692.52 E 5903056.72 N 36 59.73003 S 175 20.71011 E pt3 1809044.17 E 5903057.72 N 36 59.72480 S 175 20.94702 E pt4 1812437.09 E 5900542.10 N 37 01.03860 S 175 23.27542 E pt5 1812488.38 E 5900030.63 N 37 01.31430 S 175 23.31865 E centroid 1810155.20 E 5901193.70 N 37 00.71727 S 175 21.72672 E trigCE78 1803776.00 E 5901633.28 N 37 00.56401 S 175 17.42069 E

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 27

APPENDIX D

Navigational Marks - General Two systems of buoyage and beaconage are used in New Zealand, these are defined in the Maritime New Zealand booklet New Zealand’s System Of Buoys And Beacons24 , conforming to “the International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) System ‘A’ Maritime Buoyage System. This system uses Marks which have a variety of colours, shapes and light characteristics arranged in simple ways to show the side on which a buoy or beacon should be passed when heading in a given direction, indicated on the appropriate chart.”25

The two systems are ‘Lateral Marks’ or ‘Cardinal Marks’.

Lateral marks are either painted red or green indicating “the general direction taken by the mariner when approaching a harbour, river, estuary or other waterway from seaward, or the direction determined by Maritime New Zealand.”26 In New Zealand red buoys are passed with the buoy on the vessel’s port (left) side (green to starboard) when entering port, or when proceeding in the specified direction (which is often the direction of flood tide).

Cardinal Marks “indicate that the deepest water in that area is on the named side of the mark; or indicate the safe side on which to pass a danger; or draw attention to a feature in a channel such as a bend, a junction, where a channel divides or the end of a shoal.

General Rules for Cardinal Marks

Cardinal Marks are normally pillar or spar. They are always painted in yellow and black horizontal bands and their distinctive double cone Top Marks are always black. The direction of the Top Cone Marks identifies the type of Cardinal Mark (e.g. arrows up north , arrows opposite east). The yellow and black bands differ for each mark, the Top Mark pointers act as guides (e.g. north cones point up, band on top and east cones are opposite, band in the middle).

Cardinal Marks also have a special system of flashing white lights. The rhythms are basically all “very quick” (VQ) or “quick” (Q) flashing, broken into varying lengths of the flashing phase. “Very quick” flashing is when a light flashes at a rate of either 120 or 100 flashes per minute; “quick” flashing is when a light flashes at either 60 or 50 flashes per minute.”27

The use of the cardinal system has the advantage of avoiding any uncertainty over the direction of buoyage which – particularly in an area such as the Firth of Thames - could occur should the Lateral System be employed.

The diagram below is taken from the booklet and shows a system for marking a point of interest using the ‘Cardinal System’ of buoyage.

24 Reference 14 25 ibid, page 4 26 Ibid page 7 27 Ibid page 9

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 28

In the case of the proposed marine farm, the diagram at Figure 12 reflects just such a situation with the corners of the triangle marked by a cardinal marker:

Other marks exist for specific purposes. These include ‘Special Marks’ which “indicate a special area or feature marked on a chart or referred to in appropriate nautical documents.“ See figure below. 28 One of the specific purposes for which Special Marks may be used is to indicate the presence of marine farms. Special Marks are yellow and if lighted will have a yellow light.

28 Ibid page 14

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 29

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 30

APPENDIX E.

Assessment in line with the New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code.

The following tables are taken from GUIDELINES FOR PORT AND HARBOUR RISK ASSESSMENT AND SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN NEW ZEALAND (Reference 2) and have been used in the assessment which follows.

Note that the Port and Harbour Code (and thus the assessment) does not strictly apply to the situation of the project and factors are a subjective appraisal by the Author.

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 31

STUDY : Navigation and Safety Assessment of Proposed Marine Farm Development, Western Firth of Thames Larry Robbins OBE FNI Project Ref 161001 December 2016 p 32

Western Firth of Thames Proposed Marine Farm Project - Derived Hazard List with Frequency and Consequence Scores Table E1

Hazard Assessment Remarks and overall assessment

Most Likely Worst Credible

* *

Area