DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Canterbury CMS 2013 Vol II: Maps

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Canterbury CMS 2013 Vol II: Maps BU18 BV17 BV18 BV16 Donoghues BV17 BV18 BV16 BV17 M ik onu Fergusons i R iv Kakapotahi er Pukekura W a i ta h Waitaha a a R iv e r Lake Ianthe/Matahi W an g anui Rive r BV16 BV17 BV18 BW15 BW16 BW17 BW18 Saltwater Lagoon Herepo W ha ta ro a Ri aitangi ver W taon a R ive r Lake Rotokino Rotokino Ōkārito Lagoon Te Taho Ōkārito The Forks Lake Wahapo BW15 BW16 BW16 BW17 BW17 BW18 r e v i R to ri kā Ō Lake Mapourika Perth River Tatare HAKATERE W ai CONSERVATION h o R PARK i v e r C a l le r y BW15 R BW16 AORAKI TE KAHUI BW17 BW18 iv BX15 e BX16 MOUNT COOK KAUPEKA BX17 BX18 r NATIONAL PARK CONSERVATION PARK Map 6.6 Public conservation land inventory Conservation Management Strategy Canterbury 01 2 4 6 8 Map 6 of 24 Km Conservation unit data is current as of 21/12/2012 51 Public conservation land inventory Canterbury Map table 6.7 Conservation Conservation Unit Name Legal Status Conservation Legal Description Description Unit number Unit Area I35028 Adams Wilderness Area CAWL 7143.0 Wilderness Area - s.20 Conservation Act 1987 - J35001 Rangitata/Rakaia Head Waters Conservation Area CAST 53959.6 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem J35002 Rakaia Forest Conservation Area CAST 4891.6 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem J35007 Marginal Strip - Double Hill CAMSM 19.8 Moveable Marginal Strip - s.24(1) & (2) Conservation Act 1987 - J35009 Local Purpose Reserve Public Utility Lake Stream RALP 0.5 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K34001 Central Southern Alps Wilberforce Conservation Area CAST 7454.1 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K35001 Conservation Area Rakaia Riverbed Martello Cliffs CAST 307.1 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K35077 Double Hill Conservation Area CAST 6945.1 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K35098 Glenariffe Stream Marginal Strip CAMSM 12.1 Moveable Marginal Strip - s.24(1) & (2) Conservation Act 1987 - K35099 Double Hill Stream Marginal Strip CAMSM 7.4 Moveable Marginal Strip - s.24(1) & (2) Conservation Act 1987 - K35100 Marginal Strip Glenariffe Stream CAMSM 0.8 Moveable Marginal Strip - s.24(1) & (2) Conservation Act 1987 - 52 Mananui Rimu Woodstock Ka ni ere Riv e BU18 r BU19 BU20 BV17 BV18 BV19 BV20 Milltown Lake Mahinapua Ruatapu Kokatahi Lake Kaniere r tika Riv e ki o H Kowhitirangi K oka tahi River Donoghues BV17 BV18 BV18 BV19 BV19 BV20 M iko nu i R ive r ARTHUR'S PASS NATIONAL PARK W K34001 h i t co m b River ngo e e Mu R i v e r CRAIGIEBURN BV17 BV18 BV19 FOREST PARK BV20 BW17 BW18 BW19 BW20 BW19 BW20 K34024 J35002 J35001 W i lb e Kruger r M f athi Hill or as R c e iver R River iv aia e ak r R K35001 BW17 BW18 BW18 BW19 I35028 K35046 J35007 K35100 am K350901 tre e S k K35099 a K35098 K35002 L J35009 K35077 La k e e S t r e a m HAKATERE BW17 BW18 BW19 CONSERVATIONBW20 BX17 BX18 BX19 PARK BX20 Map 6.7 Public conservation land inventory Conservation Management Strategy Canterbury 01 2 4 6 8 Map 7 of 24 Km Conservation unit data is current as of 21/12/2012 53 Public conservation land inventory Canterbury Map table 6.8 Conservation Conservation Unit Name Legal Status Conservation Legal Description Description Unit number Unit Area K33005 Arthur's Pass National Park NPNP 87544.4 National Park - s.4 National Parks Act 1980 Priority ecosystem K33501 Conservation Area Arthur's Pass Village CAST 1.5 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K33503 Conservation Area Arthur's Pass Village CAST 0.7 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K33509 Conservation Area Arthur's Pass Village CAST 0.9 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K33512 Hawdon Flats Government Purpose Reserve National Park RAGP 1056.6 Government Purpose Reserve - s.22 Reserves Act 1977 Priority ecosystem K33513 Conservation Area Arthur's Pass Village CAST 0.2 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K33514 Conservation Area Hawdon River CAST 15.5 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K33517 Conservation Area Arthur's Pass Village CAST 0.1 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K33518 Conservation Area Arthur's Pass Village CAST 0.5 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K34002 Craigieburn Forest Park CACP 44691.4 Conservation Park - s.19 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K34003 Hogs Back Conservation Area CAST 9.4 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K34007 Conservation Area Bealey Spur CAST 3.4 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34009 Conservation Area Bealey Spur CAST 1.2 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34011 Conservation Area Bealey/Waimakariri Riverbed CAST 252.6 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34012 Conservation Area Bealey Spur CAST 18.6 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34013 Conservation Area Bealey Spur CAST 16.9 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34014 Conservation Area Waimakariri Riverbed Paddys Bend CAST 15.9 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34015 Cora Lynn Gravel Reserve RALP 58.1 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K34017 Corner Knob And Goldney Hill Government Purpose Reserve RAGP 112.3 Government Purpose Reserve - s.22 Reserves Act 1977 - K34024 Conservation Area Wilberforce Riverbed CAST 126.2 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34025 Scenic Reserve Prebble Hill RASRA 8.1 Scenic Reserve - s.19(1)(a) Reserves Act 1977 - K34026 Lake Ida Conservation Area CAST 15.3 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K34028 Cave Stream Scenic Reserve RASRA 15.7 Scenic Reserve - s.19(1)(a) Reserves Act 1977 - K34029 Enys Scientific Reserve RASI 4.4 Scientific Reserve - s.21 Reserves Act 1977 - K34031 Lance Mccaskill Nature Reserve RANT 6.4 Nature Reserve - s.20 Reserves Act 1977 - K34032 Kura Tawhiti Conservation Area CAST 54.0 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34037 Castle Hill Village Marginal Strip CAMS 2.9 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K34043 Broad Stream Marginal Strip CAMS 0.4 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K34044 Craigieburn Stream Marginal Strip CAMS 0.2 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K34047 Conservation Area - Castle Hill CAST 8465.3 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K34093 Spittle Hill Conservation Area CAST 31.2 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K34094 Redcliffe Stream Marginal Strip CAMS 9.9 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35002 Conservation Area Rakaia Riverbed Glenaan CAST 14.3 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K35003 Gravel Reserve Algidus Road RALP 0.8 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K35004 Gravel Reserve Algidus Road RALP 0.8 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K35005 Gravel Reserve Algidus Road RALP 0.8 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K35006 Gravel Reserve Algidus Road RALP 0.8 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K35007 Gravel Reserve Algidus Road RALP 0.9 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K35010 Porter Heights Conservation Area CAST 727.6 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K35012 Community Buildings Reserve Lake Lyndon RALP 1.9 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K35013 Korowai Marginal Strip CAMSM 0.4 Moveable Marginal Strip - s.24(1) & (2) Conservation Act 1987 - K35014 Conservation Area Redcliffe CAST 0.9 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K35016 Conservation Area The Acheron CAST 2.0 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 - K35023 Gravel Reserve Little Snowdon RALP 0.4 Local Purpose Reserve - s.23 Reserves Act 1977 - K35042 Acheron River Marginal Strip CAMS 44.0 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35046 Conservation Area Rakaia River Margin Martello Cliffs CAST 10.9 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K35048 Conservation Area Rakaia River Margin Peak Hill CAST 10.4 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K35049 Lake Lyndon Marginal Strip CAMS 12.0 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K35050 Acheron River Marginal Strip CAMS 4.2 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35051 Acheron River Marginal Strip CAMS 3.0 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35052 Acheron River Marginal Strip CAMS 4.6 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K35054 Ben More Marginal Strip CAMS 6.6 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35058 Bush Stream Marginal Strip CAMS 6.7 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35059 Bush Stream Marginal Strip CAMS 4.6 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35060 High Peak Road Marginal Strip CAMS 0.9 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35061 High Peak Road Marginal Strip CAMS 0.9 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 - K35067 Rakaia River Marginal Strip CAMS 10.3 Fixed Marginal Strip - s.24(3) Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K35070 Korowai Torlesse Tussocklands Park CACP 20738.6 Conservation Park - s.19 Conservation Act 1987 Priority ecosystem K350735 Mount Hutt Conservation Area Marginal Strips CAMSM 22.9 Moveable Marginal Strip - s.24(1) & (2) Conservation Act 1987 - K35079 Peak Hill Conservation Area CAST 628.1 Stewardship Area - s.25 Conservation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Upper Riccarton Cemetery 2007 1
    St Peter’s, Upper Riccarton, is the graveyard of owners and trainers of the great horses of the racing and trotting worlds. People buried here have been in charge of horses which have won the A. J. C. Derby, the V.R.C. Derby, the Oaks, Melbourne Cup, Cox Plate, Auckland Cup (both codes), New Zealand Cup (both codes) and Wellington Cup. Area 1 Row A Robert John Witty. Robert John Witty (‘Peter’ to his friends) was born in Nelson in 1913 and attended Christchurch Boys’ High School, College House and Canterbury College. Ordained priest in 1940, he was Vicar of New Brighton, St. Luke’s and Lyttelton. He reached the position of Archdeacon. Director of the British Sailors’ Society from 1945 till his death, he was, in 1976, awarded the Queen’s Service Medal for his work with seamen. Unofficial exorcist of the Anglican Diocese of Christchurch, Witty did not look for customers; rather they found him. He said of one Catholic lady: “Her priest put her on to me; they have a habit of doing that”. Problems included poltergeists, shuffling sounds, knockings, tapping, steps tramping up and down stairways and corridors, pictures turning to face the wall, cold patches of air and draughts. Witty heard the ringing of Victorian bells - which no longer existed - in the hallway of St. Luke’s vicarage. He thought that the bells were rung by the shade of the Rev. Arthur Lingard who came home to die at the vicarage then occupied by his parents, Eleanor and Archdeacon Edward Atherton Lingard. In fact, Arthur was moved to Miss Stronach’s private hospital where he died on 23 December 1899.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan
    Proposed Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan Incorporating s42A Recommendations 19 Feb 2012 Note: Grey text to be dealt with at a future hearing (This page is intentionally blank) This is the approved Proposed Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan, by the Canterbury Regional Council The Common Seal of the Canterbury Regional Council was fixed in the presence of: Bill Bayfield Chief Executive Canterbury Regional Council Dame Margaret Bazley Chair Canterbury Regional Council 24 Edward Street, Lincoln 75 Church Street P O Box 345 P O Box 550 Christchurch Timaru Phone (03) 365 3828 Phone (03) 688 9060 Fax (03) 365 3194 Fax (03) 688 9067 (This page is intentionally blank) Proposed Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan Incorporating s42A Recommendations KARANGA Haere mai rā Ngā maunga, ngā awa, ngā waka ki runga i te kaupapa whakahirahira nei Te tiakitanga o te whenua, o te wai ki uta ki tai Tuia te pakiaka o te rangi ki te whenua Tuia ngā aho te Tiriti Tuia i runga, Tuia i raro Tuia ngā herenga tangata Ka rongo te po, ka rongo te ao Tēnei mātou ngā Poupou o Rokohouia, ngā Hua o tōna whata-kai E mihi maioha atu nei ki a koutou o te rohe nei e Nau mai, haere mai, tauti mai ra e. 19 February 2013 i Proposed Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan Incorporating s42A Recommendations (This page is intentionally blank) ii 19 February 2013 Proposed Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan Incorporating s42A Recommendations TAUPARAPARA Wāhia te awa Puta i tua, Puta i waho Ko te pakiaka o te rākau o maire nuku, o maire raki, o maire o te māra whenua e
    [Show full text]
  • 3 a CONSERVATION BLUEPRINT for CHRISTCHURCH Colin D
    3 A CONSERVATION BLUEPRINT FOR CHRISTCHURCH Colin D. Meurk1 and David A. Norton2 Introduction To be 'living in changing times* is nothing new. But each new technological revolution brings an increasingly frantic pace of change. There has been a growing separation of decision-makers from the environmental consequences of their actions; there is a general alienation of people from the land, and there has been a corresponding quantum leap in environmental and social impacts. The sad and simple truth is that the huge advances in power and sophistication of our technology have not been matched by an equivalent advance in understanding and wise use of its immense power. From a natural history perspective the colonies of the European empires suffered their most dramatic changes compressed into just a few short centuries. In New Zealand over the past millenium, the Polynesians certainly left their mark on the avifauna in addition to burning the drier forests and shrublands. But this hardly compares with the biological convuolsions of the last century or so as European technology transformed just about all arable, grazable, burnable and millable land into exotic or degraded communities, regardless of their suitability for the new uses. Even today, 2 000 ha of scrub is burnt annually in North Canterbury alone. It is equally tragic, since the lessons from past mistakes are all too obvious, that there has persisted an ongoing, but barely discernible, attrition of those natural areas that survived the initial onslaught. Inevitably the greatest pressures have occurred in and around the major urban centres. The European settlers were primarily concerned with survival, development, and attempts to tame the unfamiliar countryside.
    [Show full text]
  • Kowai River Gravel Extraction
    Screenworks Ltd www.rmps.work FORM 9: APPLICATION FOR RESOURCE CONSENT UNDER SECTION 124 OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991 Kowai River Gravel Extraction To: Environment Canterbury Southern Screenworks Ltd, applies for the resource consent described below: 1. The names and addresses of the owner and occupier (other than the applicant) of any land to which the application relates are as follows: The owner of the land is The Crown that is managed through LINZ – Private Bag 4721 Christchurch Central 8140. 1. The land to which the application relates is: The application relates to the Kowai River. The site is identified as LINZ Primary Parcel 6911718. 2 The type of resource consent sought is as follows: Land Use Consent 3. A description of the activity to which the application relates is: The applicant seeks resource consent for the following activities: ● Extract gravel from the bed of the Kowai River. The subject sites are shown on the plan attached marked Attachment A and within the individual Gravel Availability Advice. 4. The following additional resource consents are required in relation to this proposal and have or have not been applied for: Not applicable. 5. I attach an assessment of any effects that the proposed activity may have on the environment in accordance with section 88 of, and the Fourth Schedule to the Act: N/A 1 Screenworks Ltd www.rmps.work 6. Attach other information (if any) required to be included in the application by the district plan or regional plan or regulations. All information is contained in the application and the plans provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Getting There Places to Fish Methods Regulations
    3 .Cam River 10. Okana River (Little River) The Cam supports reasonable populations of brown trout in The Okana River contains populations of brown trout and can the one to four pound size range. Access is available at the provide good fishing, especially in spring. Public access is available Tuahiwi end of Bramleys Road, from Youngs Road which leads off to the lower reaches of the Okana through the gate on the right Introduction Lineside Road between Kaiapoi and Rangiora and from the Lower hand side of the road opposite the Little River Hotel. Christchurch City and its surrounds are blessed with a wealth of Camside Road bridge on the north-western side of Kaiapoi. places to fish for trout and salmon. While these may not always have the same catch rates as high country waters, they offer a 11. Lake Forsyth quick and convenient break from the stress of city life. These 4. Styx River Lake Forsyth fishes best in spring, especially if the lake has recently waters are also popular with visitors to Christchurch who do not Another small stream which fishes best in spring and autumn, been opened to the sea. One of the best places is where the Akaroa have the time to fish further afield. especially at dusk. The best access sites are off Spencerville Road, Highway first comes close to the lake just after the Birdlings Flat Lower Styx Road and Kainga Road. turn-off. Getting There 5. Kaiapoi River 12. Kaituna River All of the places described in this brochure lie within a forty The Kaiapoi River experiences good runs of salmon and is one of The area just above the confluence with Lake Ellesmere offers the five minute drive of Christchurch City.
    [Show full text]
  • Siren Shockers
    Property Raging in the Outlook rain liftout P15-50 P63 Northern Outlook Wednesday, March 15, 2017 NORTH CANTERBURY’S BEST READ COMMUNITY NEWSPAPER SIREN SHOCKERS COMMUNITIES REPORTERS used their sirens and flashing vehicles under lights and sirens. recently. engines or ambulances responded lights. Examples of poor behav- ‘‘They’d shut the road and we ‘‘We had one car who wouldn’t to emergencies. Waiau Volunteer Fire Brigade iour include police cars being had to come through ... but the pull over. It was a foreign driver ‘‘We do not drive under lights chief fire officer Hugh Wells stuck for several kilometres traffic we were behind were like and we had to overtake them. He and siren to every incident, so if reckons about half of motorists behind motorists unaware of their ‘what, we’re stopped, what do you wasn’t reacting to the lights or the we are it will be important. It know just what to do when they presence and drivers panicking want us to do?’ We had lights and sirens.’’ could be your family member or see the sirens coming. and risking their lives by running sirens going and people weren’t Christchurch metro area fire best friend that we are trying to The other half either slam on red lights in the mistaken belief moving, it was quite surprising.’’ commander Dave Stackhouse get to, so please make it as easy the breaks or just plain ignore the they are ‘helping’ emergency ser- After police moved traffic said in-car distractions and for us as possible.’’ issue. vice drivers.
    [Show full text]
  • ARTHROPODA Subphylum Hexapoda Protura, Springtails, Diplura, and Insects
    NINE Phylum ARTHROPODA SUBPHYLUM HEXAPODA Protura, springtails, Diplura, and insects ROD P. MACFARLANE, PETER A. MADDISON, IAN G. ANDREW, JOCELYN A. BERRY, PETER M. JOHNS, ROBERT J. B. HOARE, MARIE-CLAUDE LARIVIÈRE, PENELOPE GREENSLADE, ROSA C. HENDERSON, COURTenaY N. SMITHERS, RicarDO L. PALMA, JOHN B. WARD, ROBERT L. C. PILGRIM, DaVID R. TOWNS, IAN McLELLAN, DAVID A. J. TEULON, TERRY R. HITCHINGS, VICTOR F. EASTOP, NICHOLAS A. MARTIN, MURRAY J. FLETCHER, MARLON A. W. STUFKENS, PAMELA J. DALE, Daniel BURCKHARDT, THOMAS R. BUCKLEY, STEVEN A. TREWICK defining feature of the Hexapoda, as the name suggests, is six legs. Also, the body comprises a head, thorax, and abdomen. The number A of abdominal segments varies, however; there are only six in the Collembola (springtails), 9–12 in the Protura, and 10 in the Diplura, whereas in all other hexapods there are strictly 11. Insects are now regarded as comprising only those hexapods with 11 abdominal segments. Whereas crustaceans are the dominant group of arthropods in the sea, hexapods prevail on land, in numbers and biomass. Altogether, the Hexapoda constitutes the most diverse group of animals – the estimated number of described species worldwide is just over 900,000, with the beetles (order Coleoptera) comprising more than a third of these. Today, the Hexapoda is considered to contain four classes – the Insecta, and the Protura, Collembola, and Diplura. The latter three classes were formerly allied with the insect orders Archaeognatha (jumping bristletails) and Thysanura (silverfish) as the insect subclass Apterygota (‘wingless’). The Apterygota is now regarded as an artificial assemblage (Bitsch & Bitsch 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation of September 4, 2010 Canterbury Earthquake
    Presentation of September 4, 2010 Canterbury Earthquake William Godwin, PG, CEG AEG Vice President, 2019-20 Webinar – May 6, 2020 Introduction ► This presentation is on the 2010 Mw 7.1 Canterbury Earthquake. The earthquake occurred as I was traveling from San Francisco to Auckland, New Zealand to attend the IAEG Congress. Upon arrival I was asked to join the Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance (GEER) team to document damage from the event in the Christchurch area of the South Island. Little did I know that another smaller (Mw 6.2), yet deadlier earthquake would strike 5 months later in close to the same area. Introduction ► The purpose of the GEER is to observe and record earthquake induced phenomena and impacts to infrastructure before evidence is removed or altered as part of cleanup efforts. ► The reconnaissance was conducted by a joint USA-NZ-Japan team with the main funding for the USA contingent coming from GEER and partial support from PEER and EERI. ► This presentation includes my photographs from Sept. 8-10 supplemented with a few photos and observations noted in the GEER report, Nov. 2010. I also describe other seismic events from 2011-16. Sept 4th Darfield Earthquake ► At 4:35 am on September 4th NZ Standard Time (16:35 Sept 3rd UTC) the rupture of a previously unrecognized strike-slip fault (Greendale Fault) beneath the Canterbury Plains of New Zealand’s South Island produced a Mw 7.1 earthquake that caused widespread damage throughout the region. Surprisingly only two people were seriously injured, with approximately 100 total injuries. This compares with 185 deaths in the 2011 event Canterbury Earthquake Sequence Greendale Fault Rupture Characteristics Epicenter (focal) depth: 10.8km Tectonic Setting Ground Motion (pga) Geographical Setting Preliminary Observations ► Rock Avalanche, Castle Rock Reserve, Littleton, Christchurch ► Fault Offset, Telegraph Rd at Grange Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • “Glacial Lake Speight”, New Zealand? an Example for the Validity of Detailed Geomorphological Assessment with the Study of Mountain Glaciations
    Express report E&G Quaternary Sci. J., 67, 25–31, 2018 https://doi.org/10.5194/egqsj-67-25-2018 © Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Disestablishing “Glacial Lake Speight”, New Zealand? An example for the validity of detailed geomorphological assessment with the study of mountain glaciations Stefan Winkler1, David Bell2, Maree Hemmingsen3, Kate Pedley2, and Anna Schoch4 1Department of Geography and Geology, University of Würzburg, Am Hubland, 97074 Würzburg, Germany 2Department of Geological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand 3Primary Science Solutions Ltd., Woodbury Street 75, Russley, Christchurch 8042, New Zealand 4Department of Geography, University of Bonn, Meckenheimer Allee 166, 53115 Bonn, Germany Correspondence: Stefan Winkler ([email protected]) Relevant dates: Received: 30 May 2018 – Revised: 10 August 2018 – Accepted: 21 August 2018 – Published: 28 August 2018 How to cite: Winkler, S., Bell, D., Hemmingsen, M., Pedley, K., and Schoch, A.: Disestablishing “Glacial Lake Speight”, New Zealand? An example for the validity of detailed geomorphological assessment with the study of mountain glaciations, E&G Quaternary Sci. J., 67, 25–31, https://doi.org/10.5194/egqsj- 67-25-2018, 2018. 1 Introduction implications beyond these fluvial aspects. Palaeoseismolog- ical studies claim to have detected signals of major Alpine The middle Waimakariri River catchment in the Southern Fault earthquakes in coastal environments along the eastern Alps of New Zealand, informally defined here as its reach up- seaboard of the South Island (McFadgen and Goff, 2005). stream of Waimakariri Gorge to the junction of Bealey River This requires high connectivity between the lower reaches of (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan
    Proposed Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan Volume 1 Prepared under the Resource Management Act 1991 August 2012 Everything is connected 2541 Land and Water Regional Plan Vol 1.indd 1 12/07/12 1:23 PM Cover photo The Rakaia River, one of the region’s braided rivers Credit: Nelson Boustead NIWA 2541 Land and Water Regional Plan Vol 1.indd 2 12/07/12 1:23 PM (this page is intentionally blank) Proposed Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan Errata The following minor errors were identified at a stage where they were unable to be included in the final printed version of the Proposed Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan. To ensure that content of the Proposed Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan is consistent with the Canterbury Regional Council’s intent, this notice should be read in conjunction with the Plan. The following corrections to the Proposed Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan have been identified: 1. Section 1.2.1, Page 1-3, second paragraph, second line – delete “as” and replace with “if”. 2. Rule 5.46, Page 5-13, Condition 3, line 1 – insert “and” after “hectare”. 3. Rule 5.96, Page 5-23, Condition 1, line 1 – delete “or diversion”; insert “activity” after “established” (this page is intentionally blank) Proposed Canterbury Land & Water Regional Plan - Volume 1 KARANGA Haere mai rā Ngā maunga, ngā awa, ngā waka ki runga i te kaupapa whakahirahira nei Te tiakitanga o te whenua, o te wai ki uta ki tai Tuia te pakiaka o te rangi ki te whenua Tuia ngā aho te Tiriti Tuia i runga, Tuia i raro Tuia ngā herenga tangata Ka rongo te po, ka rongo te ao Tēnei mātou ngā Poupou o Rokohouia, ngā Hua o tōna whata-kai E mihi maioha atu nei ki a koutou o te rohe nei e Nau mai, haere mai, tauti mai ra e.
    [Show full text]
  • Waimakariri District Flood Hazard Management Strategy
    Waimakariri District Flood Hazard Management Strategy Ashley River Floodplain Investigation Report No. R08/23 ISBN 978-1-86937-804-2 Tony Oliver June 2008 Report R08/23 ISBN 978-1-86937-804-2 58 Kilmore Street PO Box 345 Christchurch Phone (03) 365 3828 Fax (03) 365 3194 75 Church Street PO Box 550 Timaru Phone (03) 688 9069 Fax (03) 688 9067 Website: www.ecan.govt.nz Customer Services Phone 0800 324 636 Environment Canterbury Technical Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study of the Ashley River floodplain uses a combined one and two dimensional hydraulic computer model to estimate flood extent and depths on the Ashley River floodplain. Modelling has indicated the current capacity of the Ashley River stopbanked system is approximately equivalent to the 2% AEP (50 year return period) flood event. Breakouts however, could occur in more frequent events. Stopbank breaches and outflows onto the floodplain could potentially occur anywhere along the stopbanks. Breakout scenarios onto the floodplain have been modelled for the 1%, 0.5% and 0.2% AEP (i.e. 100, 200 and 500 year return period) events at the most likely breakout locations. The modelling indicates significant flooding to large areas of land between the Ashley and Waimakariri Rivers. Kaiapoi and adjacent areas are predicted to be flooded to depths over 1 metres in the 0.2% AEP (500 year return period) event. The impact of future urbanisation in Kaiapoi has also been modelled. It is hoped the floodplain maps and associated depths will assist land use planning within the area and provide information on minimum floor levels for new dwellings located on the floodplain, where appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Application of Tectonic Geomorphology in Earthquake Hazard Assessments
    Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2013 Conference, Nov 15-17, Hobart, Tasmania Application of Tectonic Geomorphology in Earthquake Hazard Assessments Beatriz Estrada 1. Corresponding Author: Senior Engineering Geologist, Pells Sullivan Meynink, Email: [email protected] Abstract Identification of earthquake sources is essential in earthquake hazard assessments. Ideally, earthquake sources should be identified by using a multidisciplinary approach that includes analysis of detailed seismological, paleoseismological, neotectonic, structural, and geophysical data. However, in many cases the required information is not readily available and the evaluation of seismic sources largely relies on the location of recorded earthquake activity. Tectonic geomorphology (ground surface evidence of tectonic and earthquake deformation) can be used to help to identify earthquake sources. Tectonic geomorphology is a relatively inexpensive tool to improve the knowledge of earthquake hazard. This paper illustrates the use of tectonic geomorphology for site specific earthquake hazard assessments in three case studies from different tectonic regions namely, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand and Western Australia. Tectonic geomorphology was used in these regions to: • Recognise potential active faults and estimate associated earthquake magnitudes. • Improve the selection of earthquake time histories used in dynamic analysis. • Assess surface deformation associated with blind faults. • Identify subtle tectonic deformation in areas of low seismicity.
    [Show full text]