DOCSLIB.ORG

Waihopai/Omaka Rivers Programme

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Waihopai/Omaka Rivers Programme Water Allocation and Use Community Meetings Waihopai/Omaka Rivers Programme • Setting the scene • Efficient allocation • Setting limits • Enhanced transfer • Encouraging storage • Effects of afforestation on water yield • Frost fighting • Next steps Setting the Scene •Pere Hawes (Manager Environmental Policy) Current management • Operative management framework for water allocation and use • Demand anticipated from aquifers and larger river catchments • “Sustainable Flow Regimes” established – Minimum flows for rivers – Allocation classes (each with a limit) Current management • Approximately 1300 water permits • Ease of access to water enabled rapid expansion of viticulture – Two appeals heard by the Environment Court • Productive value is approximately $1.1billion – 77% of the contribution is to primary production Driver 1: Review process • Statutory requirement – Review of the effectiveness and efficiency of “sustainable flow regime” – Emerging allocation issues as limits approached Driver 2: NPSFM 2014 (and 2011) • Requirement to give effect to the NPSFM 2014 – Set environmental flows/levels and allocation limits – Efficient allocation – Criteria for transfer – Encourage efficient use – Avoid future over allocation – Phase out over allocation Water Forum February 2012 • Initiated review • All water users and others with an interest in water invited • Current status of resources • Confirm issues to be addressed through review • Identified strategic issues Strategic issues • Full allocation of water resources* • Allocative efficiency* • Over allocation of water resources • Setting of limits* • Encouraging water storage* Water Allocation Working Group (WAWG) • Representatives of water users – Different water uses – Different geographical areas • Make use of experience in water management • Advise Council on management options • Has met monthly since July 2012 WAWG Membership • Clr Geoff Evans •Dr R. • Francis Maher Balasubramaniam • John Hickman (Bala) • Guy Lissaman • Steve Wilkes • Dr John Small • Neil Deans • Mike Insley • Dr John Bright • Dominic Pecchenino • John Patterson Strategic issues • Equitable access to water (WAWG)* • Certainty and reliability (WAWG)* • The effects of groundwater abstraction on surface water (WAWG)* • Effects of afforestation on water yield (WAWG)* Regional Planning and Development Committee • WAWG reported recommendations to Committee • Committee has adopted recommendations for the purpose of consultation • Test recommendations – Seeking feedback from water users and others with an interest in freshwater Purpose of Meeting • Provide briefing on management proposals for the Waihopai and Omaka catchments • Provide opportunity for feedback on these proposals Efficient Allocation • John Bright (Aqualinc Research Ltd) The issue • Difference between paper allocation and actual use – Use of generic allocation guidelines The issue Consented Rate of Take Water volume allocated but not used (locked up) Water volume actually used The issue Consented Rate of Take Water volume allocated but not used (locked up) Water volume actually used Water freed up for allocation to someone else The issue: a lot of water allocated but not used, even in dry years. Consented Rate of Take Water volume allocated but not used (locked up) Water volume actually used Water freed up for allocation to someone else Proposal • Accurately define reasonable use requirements for irrigation • Reasonable use volumes should reflect demand under efficient operations. • Demand determined by: – Crop type(s) – Soils – Climate – Irrigation method Water Permits – to use water Reasonable use volumes are specific to the property concerned and reflect climate, soils, crops, and irrigation systems on that property. Reasonable use volumes are typically set at a level that fully meets irrigation requirements on the property 9 years out of 10, and meets a large part of requirements in the very driest years. Annual irrigation water use 9 year in 10 reasonable use volume Reasonable Use Volumes by Month 9 year in 10 reasonable use volume by month (cubic metres per hectare per day) Reasonable Use Volumes by Month 9 year in 10 reasonable use volume by month (cubic metres per hectare per day) Info on Reasonable Use Volumes • Will provide on-line access to reasonable use volumes determined using IrriCalc – a tool for modelling irrigation water use • Provides default volumes • Flexibility to provide property specific information to justify alternative allocation Summary • Application of reasonable use test achieves efficient allocation Setting Limits – Waihopai River •Val Wadsworth (Surface Water Hydrologist) •Peter Hamill (Environmental Scientist) National Policy Statement Freshwater Management 2014 • Required to set environmental flows and/or levels – Allocation limit – Minimum flow Triple class system C shut-off, B restrictions begin C B shut-off, A restrictions begin Flow B A A shut-off SFR Flow decreasing with time Waihopai River - Current management • SFR Flow – Waihopai River above Gibsons Creek Diversion: 1.35 m3/s Waihopai River - Current management • Class A – 0.25 m3/s • Class B – 1.13 m3/s • Class C – 67% of any flow above 3.6 m3/s Waihopai River - Current management • Class A restriction – No take below 1.5 m3/s at Craiglochart • Class B restriction – No take below 1.9 m3/s at Craiglochart • Class C restriction – No take below 3.6 m3/s at Craiglochart • Rationing 9 8 Natural Flow Gibsons Ck 0.35 m3/s, Losses 0.15 m3/s 7 Class A allocation 0.4 0m3/s Flow after abstraction Class B allocation 1.13 m3/s 6 5 Class C allocation 2.80m3/s Flow m3/s) 4 3 2 1 Environmental flow 1.00 m3/s 0 0 1020304050607080 Time (days) Current status • Class A and Class B fully allocated • 283,000 m3/day of Class C allocated • Rationing has not been implemented • Takes of groundwater managed as surface water • Takes from tributaries have Waihopai minimum flow apply Waihopai River - Review • Minimum flows reviewed • No evidence of adverse effects at low flows • Allocation classes reviewed • Any increase/alteration in allocation adversely effects reliability of existing users • No C class limit • Concerns that exercise of large C class takes effects reliability of other C class takes • Non-compliance with NPSFW Waihopai River - Review • Rationing still required to meet SFR at Gibsons Creek diversion • Equity of treatment when compared to other Wairau catchment takes • All other Wairau catchment takes subject to Wairau River minimum flows • Effect of takes of groundwater in lower part of the catchment on river flows? 10 Natural Flow 8 Gibsons Ck Diversion 0.35 m3/s, losses 0.15 m3/s Class A allocation 0.4 0m3/s Flow after abstraction Class B allocation 1.13 m3/s 6 Class C allocation 2.80m3/s 4 Flow m3/s) 2 Environmental flow 1.00 m3/s 0 0 1020304050607080 -2 Time (days) Waihopai River - Proposal • Current triple class system retained – Allocation limits – Minimum flows • Class C capped at 2.8 m3/s • Rationing retained – Flexibility provided to users to develop own regime • Use daily average flow to administer minimum flow – Timing of daily average? Waihopai River - Proposal • Wairau River minimum flow to apply –8 m3/s at Tuamarina Waihopai River - Proposal Waihopai River - Proposal • Takes of riparian groundwater continue to be managed as Lower surface water Waihopai • Lower Waihopai groundwater takes managed separately Omaka Waihopai River - Proposal • Takes from tributaries will still attract Waihopai minimum flow Waihopai Setting Limits – Omaka River •Peter Davidson (Groundwater Scientist) •Peter Hamill (Senior Water Quality Scientist) Omaka - Current management • No Sustainable Flow Regime included in WARMP • Allocation limit for “Omaka River Valley Aquifer” • Class A of 14,860m3/day • No minimum flow set Omaka - Current management • Developed informal allocation regime over time • Successive water permits subject to more stringent environmental conditions • Match availability with certainty of supply • Seek to maintain groundwater levels at Woodbourne • Have come to be referred to as Class A, Class B and Class C Omaka – Current management • Aquifer driven by Omaka River flows • Two low yielding aquifer layers • All river flow lost to aquifer in typical summer • Underground flows continue to Woodbourne area Omaka River/Aquifer Hydrology Connection with Woodbourne Omaka River/Aquifer Hydrology – Omaka River flow range: 67 – 253,000 l/s – Shallow aquifer level range: 1.8 m. – Deeper aquifer level range: 12 m Omaka River/Aquifer Hydrology Omaka River/Aquifer Hydrology Omaka River - Current status • Fully allocated resource under informal regime • Concerns expressed in Woodbourne area regarding status of aquifer levels • Reduced reliability of existing takes Omaka River - Review • Review of informal allocation regime – Naturally ephemeral river in lower reaches – Not required to set minimum flow – Important habitat in permanently flowing reaches – Flow connection important at critical times of the year • Connection with Woodbourne investigated – Surface and subsurface flows contribute to aquifer levels at Woodbourne Omaka River - Proposal • Manage Omaka River and Woodbourne as same management unit Omaka River - Proposal • Formalise triple class system C shut-off, B restrictions begin C B shut-off, A restrictions begin Flow B A A shut-off SFR Flow decreasing with time Omaka River - Proposal • Seek to maintain aquifer levels at Woodbourne – Managing flows at which Class C, B and A can be abstracted • Seeking to retain recharge of aquifer at Woodbourne at higher flows
Load more

Recommended publications
  • WAIRAU RIVER ACCESS POINTS ᵴ = Swimming Spot ۩ = Toilet Ᵽ = Picnic Area ۩ Wairau Bar 1 Vehicle Access to the Northern Side of the Wairau River Mouth
    NELSON / MARLBOROUGH REGION MARLBOROUGH / NELSON such as a Humpy, Irresistible or Royal Wulf. If the trout are are trout the If Wulf. Royal or Irresistible Humpy, a as such NEW ZEALAND NEW first choice. If the fish are rising try a size 12 to 16 dry fly fly dry 16 to 12 size a try rising are fish the If choice. first with a red and gold veltic or articulated trout being a good good a being trout articulated or veltic gold and red a with productive method. The trout will take any type of spinner spinner of type any take will trout The method. productive TM before the wind gets up. Spinning is a popular and and popular a is Spinning up. gets wind the before wind conditions. The best fishing is often in the morning morning the in often is fishing best The conditions. wind Supported by: Supported All fishing methods work well but can be depend upon upon depend be can but well work methods fishing All size and the occasional larger fish up to 3kg. to up fish larger occasional the and size Telephone (03) 544 6382 www.fishandgame.org.nz 6382 544 (03) Telephone fishery with good numbers of brown trout around the 1kg 1kg the around trout brown of numbers good with fishery P O Box 2173, Stoke, Nelson. Stoke, 2173, Box O P 66 Champion Rd, Richmond, Rd, Champion 66 available at the south eastern end of the pond. It is a reliable reliable a is It pond. the of end eastern south the at available the shoreline.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Wairau River Sustainable Flow Regime
    REPORT NO. 2505 REVIEW OF THE WAIRAU RIVER SUSTAINABLE FLOW REGIME CAWTHRON INSTITUTE | REPORT NO. 2505 MAY 2014 REVIEW OF THE WAIRAU RIVER SUSTAINABLE FLOW REGIME JOE HAY, JOHN HAYES Marlborough District Council CAWTHRON INSTITUTE 98 Halifax Street East, Nelson 7010 | Private Bag 2, Nelson 7042 | New Zealand Ph. +64 3 548 2319 | Fax. +64 3 546 9464 www.cawthron.org.nz REVIEWED BY: APPROVED FOR RELEASE BY: Rasmus Gabrielsson Roger Young ISSUE DATE: 30 May 2014 RECOMMENDED CITATION: Hay J, Hayes J NE 2014. Review of the Wairau River sustainable flow regime. Prepared for Marlborough District Council. Cawthron Report No. 2505. 45 p. © COPYRIGHT: Cawthron Institute. This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part without further permission of the Cawthron Institute, provided that the author and Cawthron Institute are properly acknowledged. CAWTHRON INSTITUTE | REPORT NO. 2505 MAY 2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Marlborough District Council (MDC) is currently working through the process of reviewing its resource management planning. This report was commissioned to investigate issues relating to establishing appropriate flow monitoring points on the Wairau River to implement the flow sharing and rationing provisions set out in the current Wairau Awatere Resource Management Plan (WARMP) and achieve a relevant and meaningful environmental flow regime over the length of the Wairau River. Specification of flow regimes to maintain proper functioning of river ecosystems and related in-stream values require: A minimum flow to fulfil water quality and habitat requirements Allocation limits, or flow sharing rules, to maintain ecologically relevant flow variability and avoid long periods of flat-lining of the minimum flows.
    [Show full text]
  • 13 Spring Creek
    Marlboroughtown Marshlands Rapaura Ravenscliff Spring Creek Tuamarina Waikakaho Wairau Bar Wairau Pa Marlboroughtown (1878- 1923) Spring Creek (1923-) Pre 1878 1873 4th June 1873 Marlborough Provincial Council meeting included: This morning petitions were presented by Mr Dodson in favour of a vote for. Marlboroughtown School; from 15 ratepayers, against the annexation of a portion of the County of Wairau to the Borough of Blenheim another vote of £100 for a Library and Public Room in Havelock was carried. Mr Dodson moved for a vote of £50 for the School in Marlboroughtown, but a vigorous discussion arose upon it regarding Educational finance, in which Mr Seymour announced that Government would not consent to the various items for school buildings, and upon the particular subject being put to the vote it was lost. 11th June 1873 The following petition, signed by fourteen persons, was presented .to the Provincial Council by Mr George Dodson; To his Honor the Superintendent and Provincial Council of Marlborough, in Council assembled We, the undersigned residents of Spring Creek and Marlboroughtown, do humbly beg that your Honorable Council will take into consideration this our humble petition. That we have for some years felt the necessity of establishing a school in our district, and having done so we now find a great difficulty in providing the necessary funds for its maintenance, and we do humbly pray that your Honorable Council will grant such assistance as will enable us to carry on the school successfully, as without your assistance the school must lapse, We have a Teacher engaged at a salary of Fifty (50) Pounds per annum, and since the commencement of the school the attendance has been steadily increasing showing at the present time a daily average of twenty (20) children.
    [Show full text]
  • Asset Management Plan 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2030 Contents
    Asset Management Plan 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2030 Contents SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 7 Quality of supply ................................................................................................................... 47 Consumer responsiveness ................................................................................................... 51 Highlights of this AMP ............................................................................................................. 8 Cost performance ................................................................................................................. 52 Conductor renewal ................................................................................................................. 8 Network continuance ........................................................................................................... 54 Duty of care ............................................................................................................................. 8 Utilisation and losses ............................................................................................................ 58 Consumer expectations .......................................................................................................... 8 Objective commitments ....................................................................................................... 59 Uneconomic reticulation issues ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MARLBOROUGH REGIONAL FORESTRY FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN for and on Behalf of Marlborough Regional Forestry
    MARLBOROUGH REGIONAL FORESTRY FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN For and on behalf of Marlborough Regional Forestry Document review period Bi-Annual Last review June 2019 By Technical Forester Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Management Plan Introduction ................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Management Objectives .................................................................................................... 3 2 Related Documents and Systems ............................................................................................ 3 3 Forest Description .................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Forest Statistics ................................................................................................................. 4 3.2 Forest Layout ..................................................................................................................... 4 3.3 Socio Economic Conditions ............................................................................................... 5 3.4 Profile of Adjoining Lands .................................................................................................. 6 4 Environmental Management .................................................................................................... 6 4.1 Environmental limitations
    [Show full text]
  • Waikakaho/Cullen Creek Walkway Mt Richmond Forest Park
    Waikakaho/Cullen Creek Walkway Mt Richmond Forest Park Introduction The Waikakaho/Cullen Creek Walkway follows an old was found shortly after in the Waikakaho and in most goldminers’ trail across the range between the Wairau of the streams draining the schist highlands east of the Valley and Linkwater. It can be walked or ridden in one Kaituna Valley. day but you will need to arrange transport between the After quickly exhausting the easily-won surface gold road ends. It is best to begin at the Waikakaho end to the miners turned to the more difficult deep gold of avoid the steep climb on the Cullen Creek side. Both the flood plains and terraces. These had to be worked the Waikakaho and Cullen Valleys provide historically like underground solid rock mines, with deep shafts interesting half-day return trips. and tunnels. Often the mines had to be drained with The walkway is classified as a tramping track; a waterwheel-driven pumps. reasonable level of fitness and strong footwear is Also in 1888, gold-bearing quartz reefs were discovered recommended. The streams at both road ends and in the ranges above. Within a short time over 40 claims those flowing into Cullen Creek are unbridged and were licensed — on both sides of the range — and become impassable after heavy rain. numerous shafts, tunnels, and trenches were dug. Most proved unsuccessful, but by the end of 1890 about Access and how to get there 1000 tons of gold bearing quartz was waiting to be processed. Access to the start of the track at the northern end is at the end In 1891 the Ravenscliffe Gold Mining Company of Havelock London took over these claims and began processing of Cullensville Road, Linkwater.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Snapshot of Porirua
    HISTORICAL SNAPSHOT OF PORIRUA This report details the history of Porirua in order to inform the development of a ‘decolonised city’. It explains the processes which have led to present day Porirua City being as it is today. It begins by explaining the city’s origins and its first settlers, describing not only the first people to discover and settle in Porirua, but also the migration of Ngāti Toa and how they became mana whenua of the area. This report discusses the many theories on the origin and meaning behind the name Porirua, before moving on to discuss the marae establishments of the past and present. A large section of this report concerns itself with the impact that colonisation had on Porirua and its people. These impacts are physically repre- sented in the city’s current urban form and the fifth section of this report looks at how this development took place. The report then looks at how legislation has impacted on Ngāti Toa’s ability to retain their land and their recent response to this legislation. The final section of this report looks at the historical impact of religion, particularly the impact of Mormonism on Māori communities. Please note that this document was prepared using a number of sources and may differ from Ngati Toa Rangatira accounts. MĀORI SETTLEMENT The site where both the Porirua and Pauatahanui inlets meet is called Paremata Point and this area has been occupied by a range of iwi and hapū since at least 1450AD (Stodart, 1993). Paremata Point was known for its abundant natural resources (Stodart, 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • Hydroelectricity Or Wild Rivers? Climate Change Versus Natural Heritage
    1 Hydroelectricity or wild rivers? Climate change versus natural heritage May 2012 2 Acknowledgements The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment would like to express her gratitude to those who assisted with the research and preparation of this report, with special thanks to her staff who worked so tirelessly to bring it to completion. Photography Cover: Mike Walen - Aratiatia Rapids This document may be copied provided that the source is acknowledged. This report and other publications by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment are available at: www.pce.parliament.nz 3 Contents Contents 2 1 Introduction 7 3 1.1 The purpose of this report 8 1.2 Structure of report 9 1.3 What this report does not cover 9 2 Harnessing the power of water – hydroelectricity in New Zealand 11 2.1 Early hydroelectricity 13 2.2 The big dam era 15 2.3 Hydroelectricity in the twenty-first century 21 3 Wild and scenic rivers - a short history 23 3.1 Rivers were first protected in national parks 24 3.2 Legislation to protect wild and scenic rivers 25 3.3 Developing a national inventory 26 3.4 Water bodies of national importance 28 4 How wild and scenic rivers are protected 29 4.1 Protecting rivers using water conservation orders 29 4.2 Protecting rivers through conservation land 37 5 The electricity or the river – how the choice is made 43 5.1 Obtaining resource consents 44 5.2 Getting agreement to build on conservation land 47 6 Environment versus environment 49 6.1 What are the environmental benefits? 49 6.2 Comparing the two – a different approach
    [Show full text]
  • Ngati Toa Rangatira Claims Settlement Act 2014
    Ngati Toa Rangatira Claims Settlement Act 2014 Public Act 2014 No 17 Date of assent 22 April 2014 Commencement see section 2 Contents Page 1 Title 10 2 Commencement 10 Part 1 Preliminary matters and settlement of historical claims Subpart 1—Purpose of Act, historical account, acknowledgements, and apology 3 Purpose 10 4 Provisions take effect on settlement date 10 5 Act binds the Crown 10 6 Outline 11 7 Historical account and the Crown’s acknowledgements 13 and apology 8 Summary of historical account 13 9 Text of acknowledgements 15 10 Text of apology 18 Subpart 2—Interpretation 11 Interpretation of Act generally 19 12 Interpretation 19 13 Interpretation: iwi and trusts 25 14 Meaning of Ngati Toa Rangatira 27 15 Meaning of historical claims 28 1 Ngati Toa Rangatira Claims Settlement Act 2014 2014 No 17 Subpart 3—Settlement of historical claims Historical claims settled and jurisdiction of courts, etc, removed 16 Settlement of historical claims final 30 Consequential amendment to Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 17 Amendment to Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 30 Protections no longer apply 18 Certain enactments do not apply 31 19 Removal of memorials 31 Subpart 4—Other matters 20 Rule against perpetuities does not apply 33 21 Access to deed of settlement 33 22 Provisions of other Acts that have same effect 34 23 Amendment to Fisheries (South Island Customary 34 Fishing) Regulations 1999 Part 2 Cultural redress Subpart 1—Statutory acknowledgement and deeds of recognition Statutory acknowledgement 24 Interpretation 34 25 Statutory acknowledgement
    [Show full text]
  • Report 4: Hydro-Power Schemes Background and Descriptions
    Hydrological Modelling Dataset - Interim Update Report 4: Hydro-power Schemes Background and Descriptions Hydrological Modelling Dataset - Interim Update Report 4: Hydro-power Schemes Background and Descriptions Prepared By Opus International Consultants Ltd Lizzie Fox Wellington Environmental Office Water Resource Scientist L10, Majestic Centre, 100 Willis St PO Box 12 003, Thorndon, Wellington 6144 New Zealand Reviewed By Telephone: +64 4 471 7000 Dr Jack McConchie Facsimile: +64 4 499 3699 Technical Principal - Hydrology Date: August 2017 Reference: 3-53376.00 Status: 2017.2 Approved for Release By Dr Jack McConchie Technical Principal - Hydrology © Opus International Consultants Ltd 2017 Hydrological Modelling Dataset : Hydro-power Schemes Background and Descriptions i VERSION CONTROL REFERENCE ISSUE NO. DATE DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES 3-53203.00 2015.1 Nov 2015 Issue 1 3-53203.16 2016.1 3 June 2016 Interim update 2016 – draft for EA review 3-53203.16 2016.2 30 June 2016 Interim update 2016 – final for publication 3-53376.00 2017.1 30 June 2017 Interim update 2017 – draft for EA review 3-53376.00 2017.2 August 2017 Interim update 2017 – final for publication 3-53376.00 | August 2017 Opus International Consultants Ltd Hydrological Modelling Dataset : Hydro-power Schemes Background and Descriptions ii 3-53376.00 | August 2017 Opus International Consultants Ltd Hydrological Modelling Dataset : Hydro-power Schemes Background and Descriptions iii Preface A large proportion of New Zealand’s electricity needs is met by generation from hydro power. Information about the distribution of inflows, and the capability of the various hydro systems is necessary to ensure a reliable, competitive and efficient market and electricity system.
    [Show full text]
  • Benhopai Birch Hill Branch Point Hillersden Leefield Wairau Valley Wantwood
    Benhopai Birch Hill Branch Point Hillersden Leefield Wairau Valley Wantwood Benhopai (1909-1913) A large Sheep Station on Waihopai Road near Power Station 1909 2 Benhopai Haines Annie Female £ 12.00 1910 2 Benhopai Mapp Elsie Female £ 12.00 1911 2 Benhopai Mapp Elsie Female £ 12.00 1912 2 Benhopai Mapp Elsie Female £ 12.00 1913 2 Benhopai Brown Josephine Female £ 12.00 Birch Hill (1897-1902) On State Highway 63 to St Arnaud near the Wairau River 1897 Birch Hill Fisher Gertrude 1898 2 Birch Hill Fisher Gertrude Female £ 10.00 1899 2 Birch Hill Buchanan Rhoda Female £ 10.00 1900 3 Birch Hill Buchanan Rhoda Female £ 15.00 1901 2 Birch Hill Burns Vera Female £ 10.00 1902 2 Birch Hill Burns Vera Female £ 10.00 14th September 1897 Mr William Lambey asked for assistance according to the aided school regulations of the board in the education of his two children-request granted 13th October 1897 The appointment of Miss G Fisher for the aided school at Birch Hill was confirmed 20th March 1901 Miss Vera Burns Birch Hill aided school Vice Miss Buchanan Resigned Branch Point (1913-1914, 1916) A Sheep Station at Bush Gully 1913 4 Branch Point Western Margaret Female £ 24.00 1914 5 Branch Point Western Margaret Female £ 30.00 1917 5 Branch Point Wemyss Phyliss Sole £32.00 3rd June 1916 In regard to building a school at Branch Point. The secretary of Education suggested that the two settlers concerned or even one of them should erect a small building for which the Department would consider an application to rent 23rd October 1916 Mr Arthur McBeth, whose death occurred on Friday, was, the owner of, the Branch Point sheep run, Birch ,Hill, and resided there.
    [Show full text]
  • 11 October 2018
    MARLBOROUGH DISTRICT COUNCIL TELEPHONE (0064) 3 520 7400 15 SEYMOUR STREET FACSIMILE (0064) 3 520 7496 PO BOX 443, BLENHEIM 7240 EMAIL [email protected] NEW ZEALAND WEB www.marlborough.govt.nz 5 October 2018 Record No: 18223360 File Ref: D050-001-E01 Ask For: Nicole Chauval Notice of Committee Meeting – Thursday, 11 October 2018 A meeting of the Environment Committee will be held in the Council Chambers, District Council Administration Building, 15 Seymour Street, Blenheim on Thursday, 11 October 2018 commencing at 9.00 am. BUSINESS As per Agenda attached. MARK WHEELER CHIEF EXECUTIVE Meeting of the ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE to be held in the Council Chambers, 15 Seymour Street, on THURSDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2018 commencing at 9.00 am Committee Clr D D Oddie (Chairperson) Clr G A Hope (Deputy) Clr J A Arbuckle Clr T E Hook Clr C J Brooks Clr L M Shenfield Clr N P Taylor Mayor J C Leggett Mr E R Beech (Rural representative) Departmental Head Mr H Versteegh (Manager, Regulatory Department) Staff N Chauval (Committee Secretary) In Public Page 1. Apologies ........................................................................................................................................ 1 2. Declaration of Interests .................................................................................................................. 1 3. Resource Hearing Commissioner Decision .................................................................................. 2 4. Wairau Plain Liquefaction Risk Assessment .................................................................................
    [Show full text]