DOCSLIB.ORG

Supporting LGNZ's Local Government Sector

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Supporting LGNZ's Local Government Sector Action for healthy waterways: A discussion document on national direction for our essential freshwater Local Government New Zealand’s submission to the Ministry for the Environment 31 October 2019 1 2 We are. LGNZ. LGNZ is the national organisation of local authorities in New Zealand and all 78 councils are members. We represent the interests of councils and lead best practice in the local government sector. LGNZ provides advocacy and policy services, business support, advice and training to our members to assist them to build successful communities throughout New Zealand. Our purpose is to deliver our sector’s Vision: “Local democracy powering community and national success.” This final submission was endorsed under delegated authority by Dave Cull, President, Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) and Doug Leeder, Chair of LGNZ’s Regional Sector. This submission has been prepared by the Regional Sector Water Subgroup (RSWG)] on behalf of wider local government sector, comprising regional councils, unitary authorities and territorial authorities (the Sector)]. All those parties have been consulted and have actively contributed to the development of this submission. It represents their collective and common position on the merits and challenges of the Essential Freshwater Reform package (EFW package) as set out in the discussion document Action for Healthy Waterways and the accompanying draft national instruments1. To the extent that individual councils have made their own submissions, those submissions should be read as being in addition to the matters raised here. Individual councils’ submissions inevitably address matters of particular interest and relevance to their respective regions and districts that may not be addressed in this sector-wide submission. In preparing this submission, the Sector is very aware that it wears several ‘hats’ in the national freshwater conversation. • Regional councils, unitary authorities and city and territorial authorities all have a responsibility under the Local Government Act (LGA) to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future. • Regional councils also have the regulatory function of managing water under the Resource Management Act (RMA) towards the specific purpose of promoting sustainable management and to achieve a range of environmental outcomes. • Both the regional councils and the wider local government sector also wear the hat of a resource user in terms of their service delivery responsibilities for, in particular, flood management and the provision of ‘three waters’ services. Where relevant this submission distinguishes between submission points made wearing these different hats. Where “regional councils” are referred to throughout this submission this also includes unitary authorities discharging their regional council functions. 1 Draft Freshwater NES, Draft National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and Stock Exclusion Regulations. 3 Foreword Kia ora There are very few matters of public policy where all the stakeholders aspire to the same outcome, but freshwater appears to be one of those exceptions. Everyone wants to see the quality of our lakes, rivers, wetlands and steams improve, be they central government, councils, iwi/Māori, farmers, industry, environmental groups, and rural and urban communities. Where the views differ is in how we deliver on this outcome. Any significant policy change will, by its nature, give rise to costs and benefits, which will be hotly debated among stakeholders. This is to be expected and welcomed as part of the democratic process, one that improves policy development by inviting critical assessment and new ideas into the discussion. That is the spirit with which LGNZ has engaged with the Essential Freshwater Package. Regional councils have worked closely with Government and committed significant resources to help inform the thinking on freshwater policy. Using their extensive on-the-ground experience as water regulators, regional councils have also tested whether the proposed package will deliver on the intended goals, outlined the trade-offs, and looked at how the costs and benefits are likely to be distributed across the country. The results of this work can be found in this submission. Our intent is to constructively and collaboratively help develop the new regulatory framework that delivers on the freshwater outcomes that all New Zealanders want as a key driver of their well-being. We look forward to engaging with you as the policy development process proceeds. Dave Cull Doug Leeder President Chair LGNZ LGNZ Regional Sector 4 Key messages In responding to the Government’s substantial body of reform proposals, the wider sector is committed to work together with the Government, tangata whenua and stakeholders to deliver healthy freshwater for all our communities. The Regional Sector sees itself as a partner in the management of New Zealand’s freshwater not as just an implementer or just another stakeholder. The comments made in this submission are made as part of a genuine desire to deliver the fastest possible progress towards achieving sustainable and durable solutions to the issues we face. Overall, we believe that the best way to deliver on that ambition is to build on what has already been agreed with our communities and what we know to be successful. In that regard, the Regional Sector welcomes a reform package that offers us clear direction, empowerment and the provision of tools. It does not support prescription that limits how councils can respond or which redirects our effort in ways that make us less effective as freshwater managers. The following key messages need to be read in that context. • In its role as both promoter of well-being and as environmental regulator, local government strongly supports the reform objectives and the desire to improve water quality and ecosystem health. In principle, we support many aspects of the package including building on the Te Mana o te Wai framework, strengthening management of freshwater ecosystem health, and national regulation to manage contaminant losses from high risk rural land use practices. • While the support for the reform objectives is strong, local government is very conscious of its responsibility under both the Local Government Act and the Resource Management Act to manage land and freshwater in a way and at a rate that enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being. • Commitments to halt decline and secure improvements in water quality and ecosystem health are already reflected in the work programmes (and in many cases operative statutory plans) across regional and unitary councils. There is no shortage of commitment by all of local government to maintaining and improving water quality and the values we all share in water2. Despite that, we accept that there are many elements of the existing policy and legal framework that could be amended or augmented to help the Regional Sector do its job as environmental regulator more efficiently and effectively. The EFW package includes many of those changes and those proposals are commented on in this submission. Overall though, we think the reform package lacks a clear and accurate problem definition. • One of our biggest concerns with the package is that it seems based on a premise that the issues are severe and urgent everywhere and, accordingly, that there is the same need for management intervention everywhere, in the same way and in the same timeframes. That is not our analysis of the challenge in front of us. Our information clearly indicates that freshwater problems remain highly variable around the country. In many respects, responses need to be far more bespoke than the EFW package suggests. Furthermore, opportunities exist for national resources to be prioritised to get the most benefit the fastest by targeting priority issues and catchments. • We are concerned that the new and additional obligations and, in particular, the emphasis on increasing measurability, accounting and reporting of instream outcomes, will distract councils from taking the practical measures that will make a material difference for freshwater outcomes. While there is truth in the saying that ‘you cannot manage what you cannot measure’, in a world of limited resources there is a balance that needs to be struck. The EFW package has not got that balance right. We believe that delivering an increased emphasis on monitoring and reporting will occur at the expense of delivering practical on-the-ground programmes that we know, from decades of experience, will drive real change. The management of sediment is a 2 See the Sector’s declaration at: https://www.lgnz.co.nz/our-work/publications/local-government-leaders-water-declaration/ 5 particular case in point. We can spend a lot of time and money trying to measure sediment in streams but no matter what we find we know the answer lies in land management programmes that deliver tangible action. • Our scientists advise that there is not the requisite rigour behind all the proposed attributes and monitoring proposals. It appears that application of some of the proposed 23 attributes will be inappropriate in certain circumstances. The DIN/DRP attributes in particular, have been developed on a basis that means the national bottom lines will be not necessarily applicable at the regional or catchment scale. Other attributes such, and Fish-IBI, LakeSPI and ecosystem metabolism
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Combined Irrigation / Flood Control Storage in Upper Rangitāiki
    Combined Irrigation and Flood Storage in Upper Rangitāiki Catchment Bay of Plenty Regional Council 13-Jan-2017 Doc No. 1 Combined Irrigation / Flood Control Storage in Upper Rangitāiki Initial Feasibility Study 13-Jan-2017 Prepared for – Bay of Plenty Regional Council – Co No.: N/A AECOM Combined Irrigation and Flood Storage in Upper Rangitāiki Catchment Combined Irrigation / Flood Control Storage in Upper Rangitāiki – Initial Feasibility Study Combined Irrigation / Flood Control Storage in Upper Rangitāiki Initial Feasibility Study Client: Bay of Plenty Regional Council Co No.: N/A Prepared by AECOM New Zealand Limited 121 Rostrevor Street, Hamilton 3204, PO Box 434, Waikato MC, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand T +64 7 834 8980 F +64 7 834 8981 www.aecom.com 13-Jan-2017 Job No.: 60493009 AECOM in Australia and New Zealand is certified to ISO9001, ISO14001 AS/NZS4801 and OHSAS18001. © AECOM New Zealand Limited (AECOM). All rights reserved. AECOM has prepared this document for the sole use of the Client and for a specific purpose, each as expressly stated in the document. No other party should rely on this document without the prior written consent of AECOM. AECOM undertakes no duty, nor accepts any responsibility, to any third party who may rely upon or use this document. This document has been prepared based on the Client’s description of its requirements and AECOM’s experience, having regard to assumptions that AECOM can reasonably be expected to make in accordance with sound professional principles. AECOM may also have relied upon information provided by the Client and other third parties to prepare this document, some of which may not have been verified.
    [Show full text]
  • Beneath the Reflections
    Beneath the Reflections A user’s guide to the Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine Area Acknowledgements This guide was prepared by the Fiordland Marine Guardians, the Ministry for the Environment, the Ministry for Primary Industries (formerly the Ministry of Fisheries and MAF Biosecurity New Zealand), the Department of Conservation, and Environment Southland. This guide would not have been possible without the assistance of a great many people who provided information, advice and photos. To each and everyone one of you we offer our sincere gratitude. We formally acknowledge Fiordland Cinema for the scenes from the film Ata Whenua and Land Information New Zealand for supplying navigational charts for generating anchorage maps. Cover photo kindly provided by Destination Fiordland. Credit: J. Vale Disclaimer While reasonable endeavours have been made to ensure this information is accurate and up to date, the New Zealand Government makes no warranty, express or implied, nor assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, correctness, completeness or use of any information that is available or referred to in this publication. The contents of this guide should not be construed as authoritative in any way and may be subject to change without notice. Those using the guide should seek specific and up to date information from an authoritative source in relation to: fishing, navigation, moorings, anchorages and radio communications in and around the fiords. Each page in this guide must be read in conjunction with this disclaimer and any other disclaimer that forms part of it. Those who ignore this disclaimer do so at their own risk.
    [Show full text]
  • A HISTORY of the TUARARANGAIA BLOCKS Wai894 #A3 Wai36 #A22 Wai 726 #A4
    A HISTORY OF THE TUARARANGAIA BLOCKS Wai894 #A3 Wai36 #A22 Wai 726 #A4 PETER CLAYWORTH A REPORT COMMISSIONED BY THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL MAY 2001 CONTENTS LIST OF MAPS ....................................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... 6 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 8 i.i Claims relating to the Tuararangaia blocks ...................................................................... 12 CHAPTER 1: THE TUARARANGAIA BLOCK: TE WHENUA, TE TANGATA ....... 16 1.1 Te Whenua, Te Ngahere ................................................................................................. 16 1.2 Early occupation and resource uses ................................................................................ 19 1.3 Hapu and iwi associated with Tuararangaia ................................................................... 22 1.3.1 Ngati Awa ................................................................................................................. 22 1.3.2 Ngati Pukeko ............................................................................................................. 23 1.3.3 Warahoe .................................................................................................................... 24 1.3.4 Ngati Hamua ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rangitāiki River Forum
    Rangitāiki River Forum NOTICE IS GIVEN that the next meeting of the Rangitāiki River Forum will be held in Council Chambers, Whakatāne District Council, Civic Centre, Commerce Street, Whakatāne on: Friday, 7 June 2019 commencing at 10.00 am. Maramena Vercoe Chairperson Rangitāiki River Forum Rangit āiki River Forum Terms of Reference Interpretation “Rangit āiki River” means the Rangit āiki River and its catchment, including the: • Rangit āiki River • Whirinaki River • Wheao River • Horomanga River The scope and delegation of this Forum covers the geographical area of the Rangit āiki River catchment as shown in the attached map. Purpose The purpose of the Forum is as set out in Ng āti Manawa Claims Settlement Act 2012 and the Ng āti Whare Claims Settlement Act 2012: The purpose of the Forum is the protection and enhancement of the environmental, cultural, and spiritual health and wellbeing of the Rangit āiki River and its resources for the benefit of present and future generations. Despite the composition of the Forum as described in section 108, the Forum is a joint committee of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council and the Whakat āne District Council within the meaning of clause 30(1)(b) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002. Despite Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Forum— (a) is a permanent committee; and (b) must not be discharged unless all appointers agree to the Forum being discharged. The members of the Forum must act in a manner so as to achieve the purpose of the Forum. Functions The principle function of the Forum is to achieve its purpose.
    [Show full text]
  • PART ONE This Management Plan
    F I S H AND GAME NEW ZEALAND WEST COAST REGION SPORTS FISH AND GAME MANAGEMENT PLAN To manage, maintain and enhance the sports fish and game resource in the recreational interests of anglers and hunters AIRPORT DRIVE PO BOX 179 HOKITIKA 1 2 FOREWORD FROM THE CHAIRMAN I am pleased to present the Sportsfish and Game Management Plan for the West Coast Fish and Game Council. This plan has been prepared in line with the statutory responsibilities of Fish and Game West Coast following extensive consultation with a wide range of stakeholders. It identifies issues and establishes goals, objectives, and implementation methods for all output classes. While it provides an excellent snapshot-in-time of Fish and Game West Coast it should be noted that, as well as ongoing issues, there are likely to be further challenges in the future which will have the potential to impact on angler/hunter opportunities and satisfaction. To this extent, this plan must be seen as a document designed to be capable of addressing changing requirements by way of the annual workplan and in response to ongoing input from anglers and hunters, as well as other users of fish and game habitat. The West Coast Fish and Game Council welcomes such input. Andy Harris Chairman 3 SPORTS FISH AND GAME MANAGEMENT PLAN To manage, maintain and enhance the sports fish and game resource in the recreational interests of anglers and hunters CONTENTS Foreword from the chairman ................................................. 3 Contents .................................................................................... 4 Executive summary .................................................................. 5 PART ONE This management plan ............................................................ 6 Introduction .............................................................................. 8 PART TWO Goals and objectives ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Trustpower-Soe-Greg-Ryder.Pdf
    IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER of Proposed Plan Change 9 to the Bay of Plenty Regional Natural Resources Plan AND submissions and further submissions by Trustpower Limited STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF GREGORY IAN RYDER Evidence of G. I. Ryder 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 My full name is Gregory Ian Ryder. 1.2 I hold BSc. (First Class Honours) (1984) and PhD. (1989) degrees in Zoology from the University of Otago. For both my honours dissertation and PhD. thesis I studied stream ecology with particular emphasis on sedimentation and benthic macroinvertebrates. 1.3 I am a member of the following professional societies: (a) New Zealand Freshwater Society; (b) Royal Society of New Zealand; (c) Society for Freshwater Science (North America). 1.4 I am a Director and Environmental Scientist at Ryder Environmental Limited (Ryder) and have worked as a consultant for approximately 25 years. I work largely in the field of surface water quality and aquatic ecology. I also fulfil the role of an independent commissioner and have sat on over 25 resource consent hearings. 1.5 I have undertaken or been associated with a large number of investigations that have assessed the effects of abstractions and discharges on surface water ecosystems, the effects of existing and proposed impoundments, and the effects of land use activities that produce point source and non-point source discharges. 1.6 My work covers the whole of New Zealand. Private industries, utility companies, local and regional councils and government departments engage me to provide advice on a wide range of issues affecting surface waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries Assessment of Waterways Throughout the Rangitaiki WMA
    Fisheries assessment of waterways throughout the Rangitaiki WMA Title Title part 2 Bay of Plenty Regional Council Environmental Publication 2016/12 5 Quay Street PO Box 364 Whakatāne 3158 NEW ZEALAND ISSN: 1175-9372 (Print) ISSN: 1179-9471 (Online) Fisheries assessment of waterways throughout the Rangitāiki WMA Environmental Publication 2016/12 ISSN: 1175-9372 (Print) ISSN: 1179-9471 (Online) December 2016 Bay of Plenty Regional Council 5 Quay Street PO Box 364 Whakatane 3158 NEW ZEALAND Prepared by Alastair Suren, Freshwater Ecologist Acknowledgements Thanks to Julian Sykes (NIWA Christchurch), Geoff Burton, Whetu Kingi, (Te Whare Whananga O Awanuiarangi), Paddy Deegan and Sam Fuchs, for assistance with the field work. Many of the streams visited were accessible only through private land, and could only be accessed with the help and cooperation of landowners throughout the area. Funding for this work came from Rob Donald, Manager of the Science Team, Bay of Plenty Regional Council. Environmental Publication 2016/12 – Fisheries assessment of waterways throughout the Rangitāiki WMA i Dedication This report is dedicated to Geoff Burton, who was tragically taken from us too soon whilst out running near Opotiki. Although Geoff had connections to Ngati Maniapoto (Ngati Ngutu) and was born in the Waikato, he moved with his wife and children back to Torere in the early 2000s to be closer to her whanau. Geoff had been a board member of Te Kura o Torere and was also a gazetted Ngaitai kaitiaki. He was completing studies at Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi where he was studying Te Ahu o Taiao. It was during this time that his supervisors recommended Geoff to assist with the fish survey work described in this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Boundaries, Sheet Numbers and Names of Nztopo50 Series 1:50
    BM24ptBN24 BM25ptBN25 Cape Farewell Farewell Spit Puponga Seaford BN22 BN23 Mangarakau BN24 BN25 BN28 BN29ptBN28 Collingwood Kahurangi Point Paturau River Collingwood Totaranui Port Hardy Cape Stephens Rockville Onekaka Puramahoi Totaranui Waitapu Takaka Motupipi Kotinga Owhata East Takaka BP22 BP23 BP24 Uruwhenua BP25 BP26ptBP27 BP27 BP28 BP29 Marahau Heaphy Beach Gouland Downs Takaka Motueka Pepin Island Croisilles Hill Elaine Te Aumiti Endeavour Inlet Upper Kaiteriteri Takaka Bay (French Pass) Endeavour Riwaka Okiwi Inlet ptBQ30 Brooklyn Bay BP30 Lower Motueka Moutere Port Waitaria Motueka Bay Cape Koamaru Pangatotara Mariri Kenepuru Ngatimoti Kina Head Oparara Tasman Wakapuaka Hira Portage Pokororo Rai Harakeke Valley Karamea Anakiwa Thorpe Mapua Waikawa Kongahu Arapito Nelson HavelockLinkwater Stanley Picton BQ21ptBQ22 BQ22 BQ23 BQ24 Brook BQ25 BQ26 BQ27 BQ28 BQ29 Hope Stoke Kongahu Point Karamea Wangapeka Tapawera Mapua Nelson Rai Valley Havelock Koromiko Waikawa Tapawera Spring Grove Little Saddle Brightwater Para Wai-iti Okaramio Wanganui Wakefield Tadmor Tuamarina Motupiko Belgrove Rapaura Spring Creek Renwick Grovetown Tui Korere Woodbourne Golden Fairhall Seddonville Downs Blenhiem Hillersden Wairau Hector Atapo Valley BR20 BR21 BR22 BR23 BR24 BR25 BR26 BR27 BR28 BR29 Kikiwa Westport BirchfieldGranity Lyell Murchison Kawatiri Tophouse Mount Patriarch Waihopai Blenheim Seddon Seddon Waimangaroa Gowanbridge Lake Cape Grassmere Foulwind Westport Tophouse Sergeants Longford Rotoroa Hill Te Kuha Murchison Ward Tiroroa Berlins Inangahua
    [Show full text]
  • Rangitāiki River Estuary National Objectives Framework (NOF)
    Water quality and ecology of the Rangitāiki Water Management Area Rangitāiki River Estuary National Objectives Issues: Nutrients can promote excess plant and algae growth. We measure plant and algae growth by Framework (NOF) Increasing nutrients measuring the concentrations of chlorophyll-a, the The National Policy Statement includes a National Objectives Framework pigment in plants that is used for photosynthesis. (NOF), which sets compulsory national values for freshwater to protect Nuisance biological growths The Rangitāiki estuary has the highest maximum ‘human health for recreation’ and ‘ecosystem health’. chlorophyll-a concentrations and the second highest Whitebait habitat median of the Bay of Plenty river estuaries. The NOF has a series of ‘bands’ ranging from A to D, and National Bottom Lines for the following attributes in rivers: River estuaries are dynamic environments with Chlorophyll-a To protect ecosystem health: Nitrate, Ammonia 16 large changes in tidal and river flows. About 63 Median To protect human health for recreation: E.coli, Cyanobacteria percent of native freshwater fish species use 14 estuaries to swim between fresh and salt water. 25%-75% 12 Like many river estuaries, the Rangitāiki has little Min-Max aquatic vegetation or macro-algae. 10 Freshwater usually dominates the water quality 8 NOF Banding of river estuaries. Flood flows and the delivery of 6 sediment and nutrients into estuaries can make it 4 Nitrate hard for plants and animals to live and grow there. Phosphorus and nitrogen are increasing in the 2 estuary. Nitrogen is also increasing in the whole 0 Ammonia catchment, while phosphorus is only increasing in -2 the lower catchment.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries (Challenger Area Commercial Fishing) Amendment Regulations 2015
    2015/137 Fisheries (Challenger Area Commercial Fishing) Amendment Regulations 2015 Jerry Mateparae, Governor-General Order in Council At Wellington this 2nd day of June 2015 Present: His Excellency the Governor-General in Council Pursuant to section 297 of the Fisheries Act 1996, His Excellency the Governor-Gen- eral, acting on the advice and with the consent of the Executive Council, makes the following regulations. Contents Page 1 Title 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Principal regulations 2 4 Regulation 2 amended (Interpretation) 2 5 New regulation 10A inserted (Certain fishing methods prohibited 2 in areas bordering Hautai and Punakaiki marine reserves) 10A Certain fishing methods prohibited in areas bordering 2 Hautai and Punakaiki marine reserves 6 Regulation 15 amended (Offences) 4 1 Fisheries (Challenger Area Commercial Fishing) r 1 Amendment Regulations 2015 2015/137 Regulations 1 Title These regulations are the Fisheries (Challenger Area Commercial Fishing) Amendment Regulations 2015. 2 Commencement These regulations come into force on 9 July 2015. 3 Principal regulations These regulations amend the Fisheries (Challenger Area Commercial Fishing) Regulations 1986 (the principal regulations). 4 Regulation 2 amended (Interpretation) In regulation 2(1), insert in its appropriate alphabetical order: bottom trawl net means a trawl net that is operated by being drawn over the bed of any waters by 1 or more vessels underway 5 New regulation 10A inserted (Certain fishing methods prohibited in areas bordering Hautai and Punakaiki marine reserves) After regulation 10, insert: 10A Certain fishing methods prohibited in areas bordering Hautai and Puna- kaiki marine reserves (1) A commercial fisher must not use a bottom trawl net, a Danish seine net, or a dredge in Hautai, Punakaiki North, or Punakaiki South.
    [Show full text]
  • Map Collection New Zealand: Topo50 1: 50,000 Maps
    University of Waikato Library: Map Collection New Zealand: Topo50 1: 50,000 maps The Map Collection of the University of Waikato Library contains a comprehensive collection of maps from around the world with detailed coverage of New Zealand and the Pacific. North Island AS AS21/ Manawatāwhi / Three Kings AS22 Islands AT AT24 Cape Reinga AT25 North Cape (Otou) AU AU25 Houhora AU28 Pt AV28 Taupo Bay AU26 Waiharara AU29 Pt AV29 Panaki Island AU27 Mangonui AV AV25 Pt AV26 Tauroa Peninsula AV28 Whangaroa AV26 Kaitaia AV29 Russell AV27 Mangamuka AV30 Cape Brett AW AW26 Hokianga Harbour AW30 Whangaruru AW27 Rawene AW31 Tutukaka AW28 Kaikohe AW32 Poor Knights Islands AW29 Kawakawa AX AX27 Aranga AX31 Bream Head AX28 Dargaville AX32 Pts AX31, AY31, AY32 Hen and Chickens Islands AX29 Tangowahine AX33 Mokohinau Islands AX30 Whangarei Page 1 of 12 Last updated July 2013 University of Waikato Library: Map Collection New Zealand: Topo50 1: 50,000 maps North Island (continued) AY AY28 Te Kopuru AY32 Cape Rodney AY29 Ruawai AY33 Hauturu / Little Barrier Island AY30 Maungaturoto AY34 Claris AY31 Mangawhai AZ AZ29 Kaipara Head AZ33 AZ30 Kaipara Harbour AZ34 Moehau AZ31 Warkworth AZ35 Cuvier Island (Repanga Island) AZ32 Kawau Island AZ36 Pts AZ35, BA35, BA36 Mercury Islands (Iles d'Haussez) BA BA30 Helensville BA34 Coromandel BA31 Waitemata Harbour BA35 Whitianga BA32 Auckland BA36 Pt BA35 Cooks Beach BA33 Waiheke Island BB BB30 Pt BB31 Piha BB34 Thames BB31 Manukau Harbour BB35 Hikuai BB32 Papatoetoe BB36 Whangamata BB33 Hunua BB37 Pt BB36 The Aldermen
    [Show full text]
  • 4.2.6 Desired Outcome for Hokitika Place Section 4.2.6 Describes What the Hokitika Place Will Be Like in 2020 If the Direction of This CMS Is Followed
    The Mäwhera Place provides opportunities for recreational sports fishing, whitebaiting, game bird, deer, chamois, goat and pig hunting. See also Chapter 3.5 Authorised Uses of Public Conservation Lands Chapter 3.6 People’s Benefit and Enjoyment 4.2.6 Desired Outcome for Hokitika Place Section 4.2.6 describes what the Hokitika Place will be like in 2020 if the direction of this CMS is followed. See also Chapter 4.1 Desired outcome for the Conservancy 4.2.6.1 Place description The Hokitika Place extends from the Taramakau River in the north to the Waitaha River catchment in the south and inland to the crest of the Southern Alps Kä Tiritiri o te Moana (Maps 16-17). Part of Arthur’s Pass National Park is located within this Place (see Map 16). Hokitika is split in two both geologically and ecologically by the Alpine Fault, which lies about 20 km west of the crest of the Main Divide. East of the fault, the schist mountains and valleys are rugged and broken, and a large portion is protected as public conservation land. West of the fault the geology is more complex, landscapes extensively modified and public conservation lands fragmented. This Place is the historic heart of the West Coast Te Tai o Poutini ’s pounamu trade and is the scene of gold mining, forestry and farming industries - particularly dairying. Hokitika is the largest town (population of 3,700 as at 2010). 4.2.6.2 Arthur’s Pass National Park in 2020 Arthur’s Pass National Park straddles the Main Divide of the Southern Alps Kä Tiritiri o te Moana .
    [Show full text]