The Chairman and Councillors Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
NOTICE IS GIVEN that the next meeting of the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee will be held in Council Meeting Room One, Environment Bay of Plenty, 5 Quay Street, Whakatane on:
EMBARGOED Until 2 working days before meeting on:
Tuesday, 7 September 2010
commencing at 9.30 a.m.
Bill Bayfield Chief Executive
31 August 2010
A509201 A509201 Regulation Monitoring and Operations Committee – Terms of Reference
Purpose • To implement Council’s regional plans.
• To implement all Council policy, developed under the Resource Management Act 1991.
• To regulate and monitor the use, development and protection of the Bay of Plenty’s natural and physical resources.
• To oversee scientific investigations of natural resource management issues.
• To oversee Council’s river and drainage schemes and scheme assets.
• To oversee navigation safety and oil pollution response in the Bay of Plenty.
• To guide the development of regional parks.
Roles 1 To develop and review all Council operational policy, plans and strategies.
2 To implement and monitor operational activities specified in Council policy documents, including but not limited to:
• The Regional Pest Management Strategy.
• Asset management plans.
• The Rotorua Lakes Protection and Restoration Action Programme.
• The Environmental Enhancement Fund, including the allocation of funding.
• Small scale sewage reticulation subsidy scheme.
• Civil defence emergency management responsibilities, as a member of the Bay of Plenty Civil Defence Emergency Management Group.
• Regional parks, including the preparation and implementation of park management plans.
• Land for purchase for regional park purposes.
• The development, review and implementation (but not adoption) of bylaws to deliver Council policy.
• Council’s Tier II Response Plan for oil pollution incidents.
• Council’s participation in care group activities.
• Biodiversity and environmental programmes with private owners.
3 To develop, review and implement Council’s monitoring and investigation programmes for natural resources in the Bay of Plenty.
4 To monitor the state of the environment.
A509201
5 To oversee Council’s regulatory functions under the Resource Management Act 1991 (including processing applications for resource consent), the Local Government Act 1974 and 2002, the Maritime Transport Act 1974, the Biosecurity Act 1993 and any other statute relating to Council functions and all related bylaws and regulations.
6 To develop, review and implement Council’s compliance monitoring programme.
7 To implement Council’s responses to National Environmental Standards.
8 To implement Council’s environmental response function.
9 To approve enforcement action under all statues and bylaws that relate to Council’s roles and responsibilities, including resource management and navigation safety.
10 To implement Council’s contaminated sites programme.
Delegated Authority (a) Authority to delegate to any subcommittee of the Regulation, Monitoring and Investigation Operations Committee, any authorities that have been delegated by Council to the Committee and to appoint members.
(b) Authority for the governance of all statutory functions, powers and duties within its terms of reference.
(c) Authority to develop and review policy within the Committee’s terms of reference provided that the policy is in line with Council’s Ten Year Plan and Annual Plan.
(d) Authority to develop and review bylaws such as the Bay of Plenty Regional Council Floodway and Drainage Bylaw 2002 and maritime navigation and safety bylaws.
(e) Authority to submit for approval to the Maritime Safety Authority the Tier II Response Plan for oil pollution incidents.
(f) Authority to implement Council’s civil defence emergency management responsibilities as a member of the Bay of Plenty Civil Defence Emergency Management Group.
(g) Authority to enter into environmental programmes with private landowners, in accordance with the Policy on Partnerships with the Private Sector.
(h) Authority to approve funding allocations from the Environmental Enhancement Fund and to enforce Fund contract conditions.
(i) Authority to develop and adopt regional park management plans and to make decisions on the operational management of Council’s regional parks in accordance with regional park management plans.
(j) Authority to adopt and review asset management plans for Council’s river and drainage schemes.
(k) Authority to adopt and review operational policy, plans and strategies.
(l) Authority to carry out hearings under any statute for areas within its Terms of Reference (including the Local Government Act 1974 and 2002, Biosecurity Act 1993 and the Resource Management Act 1991) through subcommittees or hearings panels and to appoint members.
(m) Authority to exercise all Council’s duties, functions and powers for determining resource consent applications.
Page 4 of 69
A509201
(n) Authority to make and/or approve submissions on behalf of the Council in relation to consent applications.
(o) Authority to exercise all of Council’s regulatory functions and to make decisions on enforcement action under the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Local Government Act 1974 and 2002, the Maritime Transport Act 1974, the Biosecurity Act 1993 and any other statute relating to Council’s functions and all related bylaws and regulations.
(p) Authority, within its terms of reference, to approve the transfer of budget levels between activities or to exceed the budget level for an activity with no commensurate savings elsewhere, up to $100,000 and to recommend to Council amounts exceeding $100,000.
(q) Authority to enter into contracts on matters within its terms of reference to a maximum value of $700,000 (excluding GST) for any one contract, provided that the exercise of this power shall be subject to and within the allocation of funds set aside for that purpose in the Ten Year Plan or Annual Plan or as otherwise specifically approved by Council.
Page 5 of 69
A509201
A509201
Public Forum
Council’s Standing Orders include the provision for a public forum to be held at the beginning of its meetings. The agreed process is as follows:
1. A period of up to 15 minutes shall be set aside near the beginning of the meeting to enable members of the public to make statements about any matter on the agenda of that meeting which is open to the public, but excluding any matter on which comment could prejudice any specified statutory process the council is required to follow. 2. The time allowed for each speaker will normally be up to 5 minutes but will be up to the discretion of the chair. A maximum of 3 public participants will be allowed per meeting. 3. No statements by public participants to the Council shall be allowed unless a written, electronic or oral application has been received by the Chief Executive (Governance Team) by 12.00 noon of the working day prior to the meeting and the Chair’s approval has subsequently been obtained. The application shall include the following: name of participant;
organisation represented (if any);
meeting at which they wish to participate; and matter on the agenda to be addressed.
4. Members of the meeting may put questions to any public participants, relevant to the matter being raised through the chair. Any questions must be asked and answered within the time period given to a public participant. The chair shall determine the number of questions. 5. Where a member of the public has specialist knowledge of a matter on the agenda the chair may invite public participants to engage in discussion of that matter at the time of consideration of the agenda item by the committee.
Page 6 of 69
A509201
A509201
Committee Membership
Chairman: M Whitaker
Deputy Chairman: K Summerhays
Councillors: T Eru, J Mansell, T Marr, I Noble, N Oppatt
Ex Officio: Chairman J Cronin
Secretary: S Cubbon
Recommendations in reports are not to be construed as Council policy until adopted by Council.
Agenda
1 Apologies
2 General Business and Tabled Items
Items not on the agenda for the meeting require a resolution under section 46A of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 stating the reasons why the item was not on the agenda and why it cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.
3 Reports
3.1 Ballance Farm Environment Awards 11
Presentation from Trust members
3.2 Environmental Enhancement Fund Decisions 2010/2011 Annual Funding Round 15
3.3 Update on Lake Rotom ā Action Plan 19
'Update on Lake Rotom ā Action Plan'
3.4 Ohiwa Harbour Strategy Implementation Progress 21
3.5 Quarterly Consents Update Report 27
3.6 Review of progress with Feral Goat Management in the Eastern Bay of Plenty 33
Figure 1 Feral Goat management units Summary of goat management progress
A509201
3.7 August 2010 Flood Event 37
Valley Rd - Wharf Hydrographs
3.8 Schedule of Complaints and Enforcement Activities: 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010 43
3.9 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season 49
3.10 Report on Wastewater Treatment Plants in the region 59
3.11 Appointment and Powers of Navigation and Safety Enforcement Officers and Honorary Enforcement Officers. 75
3.12 Group Managers' Report 80
4 Consideration of General Business
Page 8 of 69
A509201
Reports
Page 9 of 69
A509201 A509201
File Reference: 5.00044 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Warwick Murray, Group Manager Land Management
Ballance Farm Environment Awards
Executive Summary
This report is a brief summary of the Ballance Farm Environment Award programme. The Ballance Farm Environment Award Management Committee will make a presentation in support.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Ballance Farm Environment Awards.
2 Background
The Farm Environment Awards have existed nationally since 1993. In 2004, The New Zealand Farm Environment Award Trust was established. The Trust's core business is promoting sustainable environmental management of land; one of the ways it does this is to implement the Ballance Farm Environment Awards. It is still responsible for this but also has a broader role in ensuring any events or awards run under the New Zealand Farm Environment Award banner stay true to the original idea.
The Balance Farm Environment awards in the Bay of Plenty are managed by the Farm Environment Award Trust (Bay of Plenty Region), which runs the awards annually. This is done by the Ballance Farm Environment Awards Management Committee. It is this committee which is presenting to you today.
About the awards
The Ballance Farm Environment Awards finds and reward farming operations that are achieving a high standard across three key factors essential to a successful farming operation:
1 Sustainable Profitability 2 Environmental awareness 3 Social and community responsibility 11
A509201 Ballance Farm Environment Awards
While the Awards are about celebrating winning practices, they are first and foremost focus on learning and knowledge sharing. For those farmers who do not yet feel they are ready to enter, the Awards are an opportunity to benchmark themselves against their peers and receive confidential constructive feedback from a team of three independent assessors. Many people enter the Awards to share ideas and expertise with the wider farming community. Notable among the entrants is a pattern of seeking methods, often in innovative ways, to find sustainable solutions to limitations that they encounter in their farming businesses. Each year one farming operation is judged as the supreme winner for the region, and seven additional awards are made across a range of farm types and businesses.
How the awards benefit the future
The awards help many farming businesses to enhance their assets in a variety of ways. Many past participants have entered to learn new ways of doing things. Farmers have said that the benefits to be gained from entering include:
• Linking sustainable farming practices to long-term profitability • The opportunity to discuss practical farm information and business with assessors from arrange of fields • Gathering new ideas and different methods from other entrants • Confirmation that current farm management practices are sustainable Ballance Farm Environment Awards Partners
The local awards benefit from having national and regional partners. Currently they are;
National Sponsors
• Ballance Agri-Nutrients • Livestock Improvement Company (LIC) • Massey University • Hill Laboratories • PGG Wrightson • Beef and Lamb • New Zealand Farm Environment Award Trust Regional Sponsors
• Bay of Plenty Regional Council • Zespri® International Limited
3 Our role
We have been working with and supporting the farm environment awards for a long time. In December 2008 the Council updated its relationship with the Farm Environment Award Trust and signed a contract agreement with them that changed the way we engage with the Ballance Farm Environment Award programme. Instead of the organisation of the Awards being undertaken by one of our communications advisers (as we used to) or directly paying some of the programme costs (as we did in 2008) we now fund the Farm Environment Award Trust (Bay of Plenty Region) with a total annual grant of $30,000.
12
A509201 Ballance Farm Environment Awards
This assists the Trust in achieving its principal objective which is;
“The advancement, education, assistance and promotion of sustainable environmental management of land and other natural resources on farms within the Bay of Plenty region”.
The Trust is also to provide reports to the Council in June and December of each year.
Council’s commitment on top of its financial obligation is to cover the print cost of meetings, have representation on the management committee and Trust (Warwick Murray – Group Manager Land Management), personnel support for the annual awards and field day, and to provide meeting rooms. We also provide one assessment judge (Biosecurity Officer Plants, Des Pooley), who supports the field day arrangements, with other Land Management staff in support if necessary, and Simon Stokes (Land Resources Manager – Eastern) is the Master of Ceremony at the Awards and supports
both event coordination and delivery.
4 Financial Implications
Current Budget
Funding falls within current budget allocation
Future Implications
As per the Ten Year Plan proposal
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
As above
Simon Stokes Manager Land Resources (Eastern)
for Group Manager Land Management
24 August 2010
13
A509201 A509201
File Reference: 1.00001 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Brian Trott, Group Manager Corporate Services
Environmental Enhancement Fund Decisions 2010/2011 Annual Funding Round
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to present the Environmental Enhancement Fund Sub-committee funding allocation decisions for the Environmental Enhancement Fund 2010/2011 funding round.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Environmental Enhancement Fund Decisions 2010/2011 Annual Funding Round.
2 Confirms that the significance of the decisions has been assessed as LOW, and under Section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) confirms that in light of the level of significance of the decisions it does not require: (a) Further identification and assessment of different options under section 77 LGA; (b) Further investigation or consideration of community views under section 78 LGA; (c) Any further written record of the manner in which section 77 and section 78 matters have been addressed.
2 Introduction
The Environmental Enhancement Fund (EEF) was established in 2000 as a proactive way for the Bay of Plenty Regional Council to work with the communities for a better environment. To date nearly $7 million has been distributed to nearly 400 environmental enhancement projects within the region.
The EEF is distributed to community groups through an annual funding round for projects seeking more than $5,000 and throughout the year for projects seeking less than $5,000. The EEF Sub-committee discusses and makes decisions on the annual funding round applications for more than $5,000, while staff are delegated to make decisions on projects seeking less than $5,000.
Currently the community relations manager has delegated authority to make decisions on applications for less than $5,000. The EEF officer and a technical officer assess
15
A509201 Environmental Enhancement Fund Decisions 2010/2011 Annual Funding Round
each application before presenting a recommendation to the community relations manager.
The EEF Sub-committee met on Wednesday, 23 July 2010 to discuss final recommendations for applicants for the 2010/2011 annual funding round for applications for projects seeking more than $5,000. The Sub-committee consists of Councillor Malcolm Whitaker (Chairman), Councillor Raewyn Bennett, Councillor Robyn Ford and Councillor Jane Nees, with apologies from Councillor Robyn Ford for the July meeting.
EEF funding breakdown
For 2010/2011 year
2010/2011 annual allocation $300,000 Unallocated funds (previous year) $50,000 Under $5,000 projects unspent $10,000 Total $360,000
To date
Funds allocated in 2010/2011 funding round (over $5,000) $187,000
Funds allocated under $5,000 projects 2010/2011 $100,000
Total remaining funds $73,000
3 Applications received
This year in the annual funding round, the EEF received 28 applications requesting more than $630,000 in funding support. Through the ongoing support provided to applicants by the EEF staff, all applications passed screening, being the first round of the decision process.
All 28 applications were assessed for project viability and scored using the assessment criteria scoring guide as outlined in the EFF Policy 2010, which was resolved by the EEF Sub-committee in early 2010. Although some applications scored highly, they failed the project viability test. This means that some high scoring projects were not recommended for funding. The maximum score a project can receive is 57.
Every application was then assessed by a member of the EEF administration team, at least one suitably qualified staff member in their field of expertise, a consents officer and an independent archaeologist. The recommendations were received by the group manager corporate services and community relations manager and presented to the EEF Sub-committee for their consideration and decisions.
4 Funding decisions
The EEF Sub-committee, under its delegated authority “to approve funding allocations from the Environmental Enhancement Fund” decided that:
• A total of 12 projects were to be funded to the value of $187,000 for this year.
16
A509201 Environmental Enhancement Fund Decisions 2010/2011 Annual Funding Round
• A sum of $100,000 was allocated for the project applications of under $5,000 within this financial year. Applications for less than $5,000 can be received all year round and do not have to wait for the prescribed timeframes that larger projects (more than $5,000) do. The EEF Sub-committee was very supportive of smaller, community based initiatives and asked to have more promotion of the under $5,000 component of the fund undertaken. Appendix to this report is an update of all the EEF applications and projects that were approved for funding in the 2009/2010 under $5,000 funding. • A half yearly report will be sent to the EEF Sub-committee advising them of decisions from the less than $5,000 funding. A running total of funds left for that area will also be included in the half yearly report.
5 Discussion
During the EEF Sub-committee meeting the following discussion and decisions were made as a result of matters raised during the July meeting.
• Ensuring that there was a level of consistency across all personnel (project officers) when assessing and scoring an EEF application. - Decision: The EEF team will look at conducting project officer workshops before the end of the year to help create a more consistent approach to scoring. • The need to include more information from the project officer’s comments into the assessment report. - Decision: This will be followed up with the IT Team to see if the comments can be included in the EEF database and run as part of the decision- making reports. If this is not possible another solution will be looked for through a manual process. • That project coordinators costs be raised from 10 percent to between 10 percent and 20 percent. - Decision: Approval by the EEF Sub-committee on a case-by-case basis and amendment of the EEF Policy will be discussed when the EEF Sub- committee meets to finalise the Policy for the next funding round. • A discussion on changes to the policy. These are some areas that need more definitions, this will assist with the funding process: • Material costs – add into the policy costs related to herbicide. • Material costs – add into the policy costs related to spraying. • Material costs – identify costs relating to costs per metre for materials and labour. - Decision: The EEF team will look at conducting project officer workshops before the end of the year to help create a more consistent approach to scoring.
6 Financial Implications
Current Budget
There is currently $187,000 that has been allocated to projects in the 2010/2011 funding round, plus $100,000 for under $5,000 projects. If further funds are required for under $5,000 projects, then staff will call a meeting of the EEF Sub-committee to seek a decision.
17
A509201 Environmental Enhancement Fund Decisions 2010/2011 Annual Funding Round
Future Implications
Council is proposing to spend up to $370,000 in grants to successful EEF applicants this year, which is the $300,000 provided annually through the Ten Year Plan plus any unspent funds from the previous financial year. This amount does not include the administration costs of running the fund.
Additionally, an allocation of $20,000 of the agreed EEF budget for the 2011/2012 year will be allocated to the He M ātapuna Akoranga memorial fund established in honour of the late Councillor Hawea Vercoe. These funds will be allocated through the annual funding round..
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
There are no Ten Year Plan or Annual Plan implications.
Kerry Heitia Document Specialist
for Group Manager Corporate Services
17 August 2010
$EEFF unding appendi x.1937.0817032233$
18
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201
2010/2011 Successful Projects
Application Applicant Project $ Project Officer
To maintain the rail corridor from Rotorua to Mamaku by carrying 2011-C001 Rotorua Ngongotahā Rail Trust $ 15,738.00 Richard Mallinson out weed control and revegetation planting
To clean up and plant a 100 metre section of the Ruruanga 2011-C002 Rotary Club of Kawerau $ 11,050.00 Des Pooley Stream in Kawerau To carry out weed control and planting of native dune species on 2011-C004 Waihī Beach Environment Society Inc $ 17,184.58 Walter Stahel the sand dunes at Waihī Beach reserves
Matekuare Te Kura Toitu Te Whaiti-Nui- To implement Stage 1 of the restoration of the Poukura Springs 2011-C005 $ 26,490.00 Mark Lumsden A-Toi Joint Venture Wetland and Lagoon in the Whirinaki Forest Park
To control weeds and plant with native trees approximately 2011-C008 Changepoint Church Landcare 1 hectare of a wetlands development programme that will $ 13,715.00 Daryll Hall eventually become Poike Park To carry out fencing, planting and restore the wetland on a block 2011-C011 Tūhoe Putaiao Trust $ 20,000.00 Ben Banks of land in the Taiarahia range at Rūātoki To enhance environmental protection of NZ dotterel, dune Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society 2011-C014 ecosystems and public safety on key eastern Bay of Plenty $ 15,315.00 David Paine of NZ - EBOP Branch beaches
To carry out pest animal and pest plant control and fencing to 2011-C015 The Tūhoe Matauranga Trust restore the natural spring, surrounding hillside and the tributary $ 9,800.00 Reuben Hawtree stream situated at Ohinenaenae
To carry out revegetation planting, landscaping/beautification and 2011-C020 Kaitiakitanga O Te Rangitāiki erect signage on an area of land which is part of the Omataroa $ 6,945.00 Mark Lumsden Rangitāiki No.2 block
To restore the mauri of the Tuapiro River and carry out 2011-C022 Ngāti Te Wai Hapū $ 27,867.00 Daryll Hall restoration works along the banks of the river To upgrade the toilet facilities at the Oteora Outdoor Education 2011-C023 Oteora Trust Board $ 8,506.00 Reuben Fraser Centre To eradicate and control privet and blackberry on an area of land 2011-C025 Tuapou Marae Working Committee $ 13,450.00 Ben Banks situated on Tuapou Pa B5
A509201
2010/2011 Unsuccessful Projects
Application Applicant Project $
2011-C003 Carbon Recovery Ltd To remove an abandoned pile of tyres on State Highway 29 $ 27,290.00
To enhance the Kaka Beak population within the Bay of Plenty by 2011-C006 Bay of Plenty Kaka Beak Recovery Group promoting the Kaka Beak and creating a conservation archive at Scion $ 19,515.00 Nursery enabling supply of plants for re-establishment
To develop walkways along the southern edge of the Western Matatā 2011-C007 Matatā Lagoon Action Committee $ 29,844.00 Lagoon between Heale Street and the Waimea Stream
2011-C009 Mamaku School To stage an environmentally themed play $ 24,618.12
2011-C010 Hannah's Bay Community Restoration Trust To restore the "dog walking area" of the Hannah's Bay Reserve $ 17,380.00
To carry out further pest control completed in 2009 and further Te Rangitupukiwaho- Kanui Waitere Wetini 2011-C012 enhance the existing and new walking track at Lake Pūpūwharau, $ 30,000.00 Whānau Trust Kawerau
To carry out weed and animal control and restoration planting on an 2011-C013 Oropi Hot Pools $ 29,560.01 area of land situated at 1 Warner Road, Oropi, Tauranga
To develop and deliver monitoring systems for the flora and fauna of 2011-C016 Forest and Bird Kaimai Mamaku Campaign $ 17,580.00 the Kaimai-Mamaku catchment area
To re-establish a viable kokako population in the Ōtānewainuku Forest 2011-C017 Ōtānewainuku Kiwi Trust $ 19,646.00 by translocating kokako from both Kaharoa and Rotoehu Forests
To implement the Trees for Survial programme successfully and 2011-C018 Tauranga Environment Centre Charitable Trust $ 30,000.00 thoroughly in the Tauranga Moana
2011-C019 EERST To install a rain tank in six schools in the Bay of Plenty area $ 10,050.00
To enhance and restore the Rangataua Harbour by developing a 2011-C021 Tonowaiora Ltd freshwater and estuarine monitoring programme for the Rangataua $ 30,000.00 Harbour Catchment
2011-C024 Bowentown Boating and Sportfishing Club To deepen Pio Channel and extend the Pio Road Esplanade Reserve $ 30,000.00
To investigate the role of pine biochar as a possible soil additive to 2011-C026 PlusGroup $ 30,000.00 improve kiwifruit soils To investigate nitrogen leaching and the role of cover crops in 2011-C027 PlusGroup $ 30,000.00 Bay of Plenty kiwifruit soils To implement phase two of the development of the Whirinaki River 2011-C028 Te Runanga O Ngāti Manawa $ 30,000.00 shared use trail
A509201
2009/2010 - Under $5,000 Project
Application Applicant Project $ Officer Status Comment
To enhance the area and provide a teaching resource for the school Walter 2010-C001 Waihi Beach Primary School $1,125 Approved and community Stahel To enhance the area around the observatory by clearing the weeds 2010-C002 Whakatane Astronomical Society Inc. $492 Des Pooley Approved and planting native plants To profile the Eastern Bay of Plenty as an adventure destination by Alexandra Partial 2010-C003 Toi EDA - Regional Economic Development Trust producing and developing advertising/promotional material, a kayaking $2,990 Approved Grenfell funding brochure and website To obtain a Wetlands Assessment Report as part of Stage 1 in 2010-C004 Bethlehem Foundation regards to the proposed development of a wetland at Elder Lane, Declined Tauranga To restore native plantings on the rivers edge enhancing environment Mark 2010-C005 Martin Whanau Trust $4,950 Approved for fauna and flora plus erosion protection Lumsden To continue to provide safe walking tracks and improve wildlife Chris 2010-C006 Tauranga Track Maintenance Volunteers $2,260 Approved survival rates at Otawa Scenic Reserve, Ōtānewainuku McKay To protect and develop the Manawahe Ecological Corridor by Partial 2010-C009 Manawahe Eco Trust enhancing habitat and flight paths for native birds, in particular Kokako $2,940 David Paine Approved funding and increase the abundance and diversity of native flora and fauna. To assist the rehabilitation and enhancement of the Tumurau lagoon Mark 2010-C011 Tumurau Care Group $4,710 Approved area Lumsden 2010-C012 Tauranga Sub Aqua Club To remove rubbish from various inner Tauranga Harbour sites $3,650 Greg Meikle Approved To organise a community participation event in conjunction with the 2010-C013 Whakatane Kiwi Trust $4,910 David Paine Approved celebration of the 100th kiwi released 2010-C014 Opotiki Playcentre To create a native nature trail at Opotiki Playcentre $1,810 Tim Senior Approved To eradicate noxious and invasive weeds through the application of 2010-C021 Wharawhara and Awanui Haparapara Trust herbicide at the Awanui Haparapara and Wharawhara lands and $4,950 Tim Senior Approved foreshores Walter Insufficient 2010-C036 Katikati College Enviro Council To carry out tree removal and enhance an area at Katikati College Declined Stahel information To carry out pest plant removal, native tree planting and regrassing as No public 2010-C037 Waitangi 3 Trust a continuation of the project 2008 C056 to restore the Waitangi Soda Ben Banks Declined access Springs To carry out pest animal control and monitor nesting of NZ dotterel at 2010-C041 Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Inc. $4,963 David Paine Approved Port Ohope Spit To protect and monitoring of endangered dotterel population between 2010-C052 NZ Dotterel Project - John Groom $3,190 David Paine Approved Matatā and the Tarawera River at Ōtamarākau To plant up a side of a hill situated next to the Marae to prevent Donna 2010-C053 Tawhitinui Marae Reserve Trust $4,300 Approved erosion Watchman To protect the Tauranga harbour and its marine environment and to Neola 2010-C054 Tauranga Harbourwatch Inc. minimise adverse effects of change on the harbour's natural $4,080 Approved Whalley environment
A509201 To reduce the impact of possums, stoats, rats and feral cats on the Alby 2010-C055 Ngatuhoa Lodge Outdoor Education Society $2,077 Approved flora and fauna. Osborne To create an ecological building and a natural play feature from adobe Stephanie Partial 2010-C056 Katikati Kindergarten $2,000 Approved by organising a workshop Twaddle funding To remove pest weeds from surrounding areas of the marae, plant 2010-C057 Tumanako Hou Charitable Trust $4,518 Ben Banks Approved native trees and pest animal control To clear gorse, bramble and bracken from the land to create a past Partial 2010-C058 Tokerau A4B Trust $2,500 Mel Whiting Approved use area of grassland to its original condition. funding To remove ivy and spray revegetation and maintain the bush walking 2010-C059 Mount Tutu Eco-Sanctuary Trust $2,610 Mel Whiting Approved tracks by replacing the rails and steps. To install a pedestrian bridge and to complete access to that Donna 2010-C060 Plummers Pt Community Group $4,995 Approved pedestrian bridge within the Jess Road salt marsh Watchman To restore the lands to a natural and environmentally friendly condition 2010-C061 Te Wehikura Lands Trust $4,990 Mel Whiting Approved by eradicating and maintaining gorse on the property Resource To remove shingle from the stopbank of the Uretara River to improve Reuben 2010-C062 Katikati Boating Club Declined consent navigation Fraser issues To build a sustainable community by utilising skills and resources of 2010-C063 Kawerau Community Garden Group $4,999 Des Pooley Approved community members To eradicate pest weeds to eliminate erosion of coastal margin Partial 2010-C064 Te Puranginui Kaitiaki $1,799 Sara Brill Approved Rangatawa Harbour and revegetate and replant with native species. funding To establish an educational native plant setting in an Early Childhood Landowner 2010-C065 City on a Hill Christian Church $4,560 Des Pooley Pending Education centre in Kawerau issues Applied to To control storm water, provide access and plant landscaping of 2010-C066 Changepoint Church Landcare Sara Brill Declined over $5000 approximately 1 hectare of our wetlands development programme fund To enhance the Houpoto wetland by removal and control of woody 2010-C067 Taumata Plantations Ltd $3,743 Tim Senior Approved weed species. To complete planting restoration and floating step ladder to protect Partial 2010-C068 Pirirakau Incorporated Society Pukemanuka Pa site whilst involving and informing hapū, community $2,500 Daryll Hall Approved funding and school children.
A509201 Update on Lake Rotom ā Action Plan.
File Reference: 4.00876 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Kataraina Maki, Sustainable Development Manager
Update on Lake Rotom ā Action Plan.
Executive Summary
Regional Council Staff will give a presentation on the implementation of the actions in the Lake Rotom ā Action Plan [refer Appendix 1]. The Lake Rotom ā Action Plan was approved by the Regional Council on 22 April 2010. Staff will outline the implementation plan and provide an update on key actions that have been undertaken in the four months since the Action Plan was approved. This will include an update on Rotorua District Council’s progress with the sewerage reticulation scheme.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, ‘Update on Lake Rotom ā Action Plan’.
2 Financial Implications
Current Budget
Information only report. No decisions with financial implications being recommended.
Future Implications
Information only report. No decisions with financial implications being recommended.
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
Information only report. No decisions with financial implications being recommended.
Nick Zaman Senior Planner
for Sustainable Development Manager
24 August 2010
$Appendix1R OTOMAactio.1960.0825094757$
19
A509201
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201 A509201 A509201
File Reference: 7.00252 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Warwick Murray, Group Manager Land Management
Ohiwa Harbour Strategy Implementation Progress
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide an update on progress in implementing actions contained within the Ohiwa Harbour Strategy.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Ohiwa Harbour Strategy Implementation Progress.
2 Background
Since June 2008 the implementation of the Ohiwa Harbour Strategy has been ongoing. A report was last presented to the committee on June 11 th 2009 and therefore this report provides an annual update on progress in implementing actions contained within the strategy.
Two significant events occurred since the last report in June 2009; Council approved a change to the Ohiwa Harbour Implementation Forum membership to allow for three iwi and one hapu to be represented individually and; the Ohiwa Harbour Implementation Forum had its inaugural hui on May 3 rd 2010.
3 Organisational Structure
To implement the Strategy actions an organisational approach and structure was required. In 2008 an inaugural meeting of stakeholders involved in the Strategy’s development agreed to form two groups, led by a representative from the Bay of Plenty Regional Council.
Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy Coordination Group (OHSCG)
This group consists of the operational and policy managers from each of the seven strategy partners and a representative from the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Fisheries. This group meets quarterly and holds its hui at all partner venues. The group is administered and led by staff from Bay of Plenty Regional Council, but any partner can chair a hui based on venue.
21
A509201 Ohiwa Harbour Strategy Implementation Progress
Its role is to implement, by development and coordination, actions within the Strategy. It also has a responsibility to support and report to the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum (OHIF). Each manager is to liaise with their OHIF representative and to report back to their organisations appropriately from each OHSCG hui.
Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum (OHIF)
The ‘Forum’ was requested during the Strategy’s hearings process by the Hearings committee. The newly formed forum provides the overseeing role for the implementation of the Strategy on behalf of the community.
A hui, including a field trip, is planned for September 1 st 2010.
Current partner representatives are;
1 Bay of Plenty Regional Council Cr Malcolm Whittaker
2 Opotiki District Council Cr Selby Fisher
3 Whakatane District Council Cr Christine Chambers
4 Waimana Kaaku Trust (on behalf of Ngai Tuhoe) Nika Rua
5 Whakatohea Robert Edwards
6 Upokorehe Maui Manuel
7 Ngati Awa Te Kei Merito
4 Strategy Actions Update
The following information is a brief summary of some of the activity that has been occurring due to implementing the Strategy. A complete list of actions status is shown in Appendix 1.
4.1 Key achievements to date include:
• Inaugural Ohiwa Harbour Implementation Forum successfully held on May 3 rd 2010 at the Bay of Plenty Regional Council premises in Whakatane.
• Since October 2008, seven OHSCG meetings have been held with representatives from all of the strategy partners. Meetings have been held at the Whakat āne and Opotiki District Council, Te Runanga O Ng āti Awa, and Bay of Plenty Regional Council.
• Toilet and sea wall infrastructure has been installed at the Ohiwa Harbour Boat ramp
• Opotiki District Council, with support from the Bay of Plenty Regional Council is constructing a walkway from Ohiwa settlement to Reeves Farm, along the edge of the Ohiwa harbour. This will provide a walking and riding opportunity for the general public which takes them off the road. Completion of this work should be in time for the Christmas period of 2011.
• Bay of Plenty Regional Council Land Management Activity Summary
1. The Ohiwa Harbour margin is 30km; 28km or 93% is protected as per the calculation requirements. 1km was added in the 2009/10 year. This
22
A509201 Ohiwa Harbour Strategy Implementation Progress
increased the protection to 97%. The BOPRC TYP target for the 2009/10 year was a 0.5% increase; we had a 4% increase so exceeded the target.
2. The Ohiwa Harbour catchment streams are 28.8km; 21.3km or 74% is protected as per the calculation requirements. 1.55km was added in the 2009/10 year. This increased the protection to 79%. The Bay of Plenty Regional Council TYP target for the 2009/10 year was a 1% increase; we had a 5% increase so exceeded the target.
3. The Nukuhou River and tributary streams are 146.5km; 105km or 72% is protected as per the calculation requirements. 5.8km was added in the 2009/10 year. This increased the protection to 76%. The Bay of Plenty Regional Council TYP target for the 2009/10 year was a 1% increase; we had a 4% increase so exceeded the target.
• Work is ongoing with the five care groups based around the harbour. This year those groups linked strongly to biodiversity will need to have a biodiversity management plan developed. This will be supported by the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. This will provide two benefits to the care groups; (1) secure funding appropriate to the groups activities; (2) provide more robust planning around achieving ecological objectives for the future.
Current activities
o Ohiwa Reserve Care Group are producing of a book on birds of Ōhiwa Harbour and their locations
o Signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with the Ōhiwa Ratepayers and Residents Association with specific regards to working together on the management of the Onekawa property, along with other key stakeholders within the community.
o Ohiwa Reserve care group have established a nature trail at Ohiwa Reserve; Nukuhou Saltmarsh has built a boardwalk; both groups are monitoring birdlife.
• The Ohiwa Harbour Sediment and Mangrove Management Plan has been completed. This plan provides actions on reducing erosion and therefore sediment entering waterways and the harbour – this defines the Eastern Land Management programme in this catchment. It also outlines the process for the management of mangroves by the community.
• Upokorehe are being supported by Bay of Plenty Regional Council with regards to applying for resource consent to remove mangroves in the Ōhiwa Harbour. Currently engagement has occurred with staff from Whakat āne District Council, Ōpōtiki District Council, Ng āti Awa, Waimana Kaaku on behalf of Ng āi T ūhoe, Whakat ōhea and the Department of Conservation. The areas proposed for removal at present are linked to those mapped at 0-25% densities based on canopy cover. This proposal area is with the Department of conservation for them to assess as part of the process required before anyone can remove mangroves.
A field trip to visit the Tauranga Harbour to see the mangrove management work in action was held on May 14 th . Twenty two people went representing Upokorehe, Whakat ōhea, Ng āti Awa, Whakat āne District Council, Ōpōtiki
23
A509201 Ohiwa Harbour Strategy Implementation Progress
District Council, and Bay of Plenty Regional Council. They visited estuary care groups who are actively involved in mangrove management.
• The Ohiwa Harbour Strategy Communications Plan has been completed. This plan outlines the protocols, work requirements, and communication tools that will be put in place over the next 3 years. Under the plan; a ‘quick guide’ for the community on the Ohiwa Harbour Strategy has been drafted; Protocols for publications have been developed and need to be worked through with the partners.
• An ecology focused technical and literature research scoping study is complete, providing a summary of all known information on the ecology of Ōhiwa Harbour. The second phase of this project is to fill in any gaps in our knowledge and to pull the information together to provide an overarching picture of the current ecological health of the harbour. There are two main recommendations to focus on – development and coordination of existing monitoring programmes for flora and water quality and a focus on monitoring indigenous fish, particularly white bait and freshwater invertebrates; and re-confirmation of flora presence and locations, particularly threatened species.
• A report on applying for Ramsar Status for Ohiwa Harbour was presented to the inaugural OHIF hui held on May 3 rd . The Forum decided to not make a decision on supporting an application. It was resolved that further engagement on the issue was required with Ōpōtiki District Council, Upokorehe, Whakat ōhea, and Waimana Kaaku Trust representing Ng āi T ūhoe. A report back to OHIF at their next hui will seek a position on whether to apply for Ramsar status or not.
• A Freshwater Survey Report of the Ohiwa Harbour has been completed.
• Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s has purchased the Tuck property at Ohiwa and are planning a day to celebrate the purchase, the site, and its history on September 11 th with Upokorehe and the Strategy partners and others.
• The OHIF has had its membership arrangements re-examined and the membership has now changed to include all four iwi to have representation (Upokorehe, Ng āi T ūhoe, Ng āti Awa, and Whakat ōhea). This issue delayed the establishment of OHIF.
• A field day was held in Ohiwa catchment on wetland construction and wetland benefits (March 10 th 2010, 70 attended).
• A contract is underway assessing resource management related actions within the Strategy. This work will provide recommendations on; a review of bylaws within the Ohiwa Harbour catchment, review and development of protocols that exist between agencies with regards to resource management requirements, and review monitoring and enforcement regimes. A presentation on the work done to date was made at the OHIF on May 3 rd . A full report will be made available and presented to OHIF on September 1 st .
4.2 Cooperation between the partner agencies, iwi, Department of Conservation, Ministry of Fisheries and the local community has been very constructive and is being facilitated by a management coordinating group.
5 Financial Implications
Current Budget
24
A509201 Ohiwa Harbour Strategy Implementation Progress
Funding falls within current budget allocation
Future Implications
As per the Ten Year Plan proposal
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
As above
Simon Stokes Manager Land Resources (Eastern)
for Group Manager Land Management
17 August 2010
$PDFV1ActionsintheO hi.1936.0824022727$
25
A509201
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201 Appendix 2
Updated actions in the Ohiwa Harbour Strategy (by theme): September 2010
The actions listed below are in order of theme which was re-assessed. The ‘Suggested Lead Agency’ as per the title are only suggestions.
Reference in Status of action as at Action Suggested Lead Agency Others involved Strategy September 2010
Health of the Estuary
7.3.1 Managing earthworks within the Bay of Plenty of Plenty Regional Council, Ōpōtiki and Implementation of current catchment Whakatāne District Councils rules in all relevant planning documents has occurred. Whakatāne District plan review is underway as is second version of Bay of Plenty of Plenty Regional Council Regional Policy Statement 7.3.2 See 13.3.4 7.3.3 Nutrient Budgeting Information Bay of Plenty of Plenty Territorial Authorities, BOPRC– Working through Regional Council Land Federated Farmers Clean Streams Accord Management) Regional Action Plan actions. Aiming to have workshops with Fonterra/Dairy NZ on nutrient budgeting. 7.3.4 Advice on Shellfish Risks To be discussed with other councils to determine who This action will be should (with Ministry of Health) take the lead on this progressed once the project. Ministry of Fisheries becomes involved Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Water Management) to provide monitoring data. 7.3.5 Stop Contamination of Urban Ōpōtiki and Whakatāne District Councils Still to be reviewed and Stormwater addressed
A509201 7.3.6 Management of Mangroves Bay of Plenty Regional Territorial Authorities, Resource consent Council (Land Ministry of Fisheries, application process Management) Department of underway being led by Conservation, Iwi, Estuary Upokorehe Care groups Kaimoana
8.3.1 Advocacy on Fishing Issues To be discussed with partners to who would like to take Still to be addressed lead. 8.3.2 Māhinga Mataitai Status for Ohiwa Local iwi Ministry of Fisheries Ngati Awa leading this Harbour action. Rohe moana still has to be established Kaitiakitanga
9.3.5 and 9.3.1 Add Kaitiakitanga into the Community’s To be discussed with partners to who would like to take All Iwi have contributed to View of Harbour Management and lead. completed document; Te developing an Iwi Planning Document Kete Kai a Te Tohu for Ohiwa Harbour Mohukihuku mo te Umu Taonoa a Tairongo. Next step is document acknowledgement 9.3.2 Whakatohea Review ‘Tawharau o Nga Whakatohea – (Timeframe Councils to assist. Whakatōhea looking into Hapu o Whakatohea’ to be determined by this action Whakatohea.) 9.3.3 Identify Ohiwa Harbour’s Cultural Local iwi Partner Councils, New Consultant hired to Heritage Zealand Historic Places progress putting research Trust (NZHPT). teams in place with Upokorehe, Waimana Kaaku, and Whakatohea to identify heritage. Ngati Awa (Bev Hughes) has presented to OHSCG on how Ngati Awa managed the process
A509201 9.3.4 Develop Protocols with Statutory Local iwi Partner Councils Still to be addressed but Agencies review of resource management planning issues is identifying a way to progress this action Recreation opportunities
10.3.1 Consider Opportunities to Obtain Territorial authorities Bay of Plenty Regional WDC focus is on Ohope Harbour Access Council, DoC, iwi, spit currently landowners, developers 10.3.2 Clarify the Status of Public Land To be discussed with other Still to be addressed councils to see if they would like to take lead. 10.3.3 Develop Reserves Vision for Ohiwa Territorial authorities Bay of Plenty Regional Still to be reviewed and Harbour Council, DOC, iwi, addressed landowners 10.3.4 Enhance Ohope Spit Harbour Edge Whakatane District Council DoC, landowners Still to be addressed Walkway 10.3.5 Assess Public Camping Facilities To be discussed with other WDC/ODC looking into this councils to see if they would action like to take lead. 10.3.6 Investigate development of Regional Bay of Plenty Regional Strategy partners, Tuck property purchased at Parks Council (Land landowners, DoC Ohiwa. This property will be Management) added to the land which will require an operational Note – Six months management plan – this is timeframe is for initial to begin very shortly and assessment only and is in should be completed by progress.) November 2010
10.3.7 Monitoring Recreation Activities Bay of Plenty Regional Water activities are Council (Harbourmaster) for monitored annually for the water related activities, Ōhiwa Harbour by BOPRC district councils for land- honorary wardens based activities.
A509201 10.3.8 Review Bylaws Relating to Higher Territorial Authorities Iwi, DoC Consultant (John Whale Impact Activities Assoc) reviewing resource management issues currently 10.3.9 Develop Policy for Controlling Vehicles Ōpōtiki and Whakatāne District Councils Bylaws being reviewed on Tidal Flats and Beaches currently by a consultant (John Whale Assoc) 10.3.10 Promote Harbour Wardens, Fisheries Bay of Plenty Regional Ministry of Fisheries, Iwi 6 wardens working Officers and Kaitiaki Council (Water honorary for BOPRC Management) managing navigation and safety bylaws. Upokorehe provide foreshore wardens to manage shellfish beds under their Kaitiaki. Ministry of Fisheries have 2 officers in Opotiki Managing development pressure
11.3.1 Understand Future Residential Territorial authorities Bay of Plenty Regional WDC is doing some Development Council, iwi, landowners analysis work on this action for their district currently under the district Plan review 11.3.2 Review Resource Management Bay of Plenty Regional Territorial authorities, iwi, Contractor (John Whale Protocols Council (Sustainable developers Assoc) reviewing resource Development) management issues currently 11.3.3 Evaluate Plans to Protect Character and To be discussed with other councils to see if they would Contractor (John Whale Estuarine Health of Ohiwa like to take lead. Bay of Plenty Regional Council Assoc) reviewing resource (Planning Frameworks) management issues currently
A509201
Natural areas, plants, and animals
12.3.1 See action 13.3.4 12.3.2 Review Monitoring and Enforcement To be discussed with other Contractor (John Whale Regimes councils to see if they would Assoc) reviewing resource like to take lead. management issues currently Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Water Management) in Completed Indigenous fish 12.3.4 Develop an Understanding of conjunction with DOC. survey for the Ōhiwa Indigenous Fish Species catchment 12.3.3 Assess Ecological Quality of Ohiwa To be discussed with Territorial Authorities and DOC as to Literature review completed Harbour who would like to take lead and recommendations being assessed to implement monitoring and research needs 12.3.5 To be discussed with other Ongoing through care Protect Bird Habitat and Species Councils/DOC to see if they group and environmental would like to take lead. programme work 12.3.6 Ramsar status for Ohiwa Harbour Bay of Plenty Regional DOC, Territorial authorities, Further discussions are Council (Sustainable iwi. occurring with regards to an Development) application
A more informed harbour community
13.3.1 Provide Coordinated Signs and To be discussed with other This action has had some Interpretive Material councils and organisations assessment in the to see if they would like to completed communication take lead. plan
13.3.2 and Develop a Communication/Education Bay of Plenty Regional Territorial Authorities, DoC, Communication Plan 13.3.3 Plan; also relates to action for website Council (to be coordinated iwi completed and year 1 development action plan by the Group that has the activities underway responsibility for overseeing the implementation of the Strategy).
A509201 13.3.4 Support the Work of Landowners and Bay of Plenty Regional Continuing BOPRC support Community Groups Council (Land of the following groups in Management) active plant and animal pest
management, and Actions 12.3.1: Develop Incentives for revegetation Landowners and 7.3.2: Planting of Estuary Care: Nukuhou unstable slopes also sit with this action Saltmarsh Coast Care: Ohiwa Land Care: Paparoa Road, Ohakana Island, Te Motu Island, Ohiwa Reserve
Land Management programme has continued in the catchment, Maraetotara Farm farm plan completed for Te Runanga O Ngati Awa 13.3.5 Review Community Suggestions Bay of Plenty Regional Walkway from Ohiwa to Council to lead but all Reeves farm under partners to assess and construction potentially implement
A509201
File Reference: 4.01074 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Helen Creagh, Consents Manager
Quarterly Consents Update Report
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to update the committee on resource consents activity for the period from 19 April to 13 August 2010.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Quarterly Consents Update Report.
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee recommend that the Regional Council:
1 Receives the report, Quarterly Consents Update Report.
2 Activity Summary
The following have been approved on behalf of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council under delegated authority during the period 19 April to 13 August 2010. Details about the consent decisions are contained in Appendix 1 to this report.
Current period 19 Previous period 1 Financial year to April to 13 August January to 16 April date 1 July 2010 to 2010 2010 13 August 2010
Notified decisions 8 2 5
Limited notified 2 2 0 decisions
Non-notified decisions 229 173 73
Total decisions issued 239 177 78
Mean processing 12 13 13 days for non-notified
27
A509201 Quarterly Consents Update Report
decisions
Mean end to end 39 43 45 days for non-notified decisions
Percentage of non- 90% 84% 84% notified consents processed within timeframe
Consents refused 4 0 4
Certificates of 0 0 0 compliance granted
Certificates of 0 0 0 compliance refused
S357 objection 2 0 1 decisions
Surrenders 35 26 9
Transfers 54 28 15
Other consents activity that has occurred during the period 19 April to 13 August 2010
Current period 19 April to 13 Previous period 1 January August 2010 to 16 April 2010
Applications received during 205 199 period
Notified consents advertised 4 3
Notified and limited notified 4 2 consent hearings held during period
The status of consent applications being processed:
As at 20 August 2010 As at 26 April 2010
Applications received 215 199
Notified consents under 1 2 submission
Limited notified consents 1 1 under submission
28
A509201 Quarterly Consents Update Report
Further information required 54 54
Written approvals required 19 17
Section 37 time extensions 60 40
Section 91 other applications 4 4 required
Withdrawal requested 2 1
Submissions closed (pre- 2 14 hearing or hearing stage)
3 Consents under appeal
The following is a summary of the resource consents currently under appeal
Consent number/s Application Locality Status
65125 Heybridge Te Puna High Court appeal 65126 Developments lodged Limited
65149 Tauranga City Southern Pipeline Appeal resolved, 65150 Council (and one (Tauranga area) awaiting the sign off 65151 application by on Restricted Coastal 65152 ONTRACK) Activities by the 65154 Minister of 65155 Conservation. 65156 65158 65218 65228 65229 65447 65478 64868 V Wills Mōtītī Island Environment Court decision being finalised
65361 Rotom ā No.1 Inc Rotorma Geothermal Environment Court 65362 Field Appeal lodged
65690 Winstone Aggregates Ōtamar ākau Environment Court 65691 mediation pending
65720 Norske Skog Tasman Kawerau Environment Court 65721 & Carter Holt Harvey decision pending 65722 65725 65806 Port of Tauranga Tauranga Environment Court 65807 Limited Appeal lodged
29
A509201 Quarterly Consents Update Report
4 Trends in Consent Application/Decision Numbers
The attached graph (Appendix 2) shows the number of incoming consent applications and outgoing decisions on a per month basis since January 2007. Six month moving averages are graphed for both sets of data. As with the previous reported period, application numbers are continuing to increase, aided by our existing lake structures consenting project and renewal applications. Decisions continue to keep pace with incoming applications.
5 Financial Implications
Current Budget
At the end of the financial year revenue of the Section was $1,585,953. This is well ahead of budget. This is a result of increased staff attention to cost recovery, increased charge out rates, large hearings and increasing productivity in the section. As is to be expected with the increased revenue, expenses were also ahead of budget. Large hearings such as the Port of Tauranga dredging application significantly boosted revenue. Therefore, this level of revenue generation may not continue.
Future Implications
Details of the Discount Regulations are now known. Discounts will accrue at 1% of the total processing costs, for every working day that the application is processed over the timeframes set in the Resource Management Act (RMA). The discount can accrue up to a maximum of 50%.
Existing good timeframe compliance means that on non-notified applications the discounts paid will be infrequent and insignificant. As a result careful management of non-notified files continues along with improvement of processes and procedures to improve timeframe compliance. Attention will be focussed on notified processes, where large bills in the tens of thousands will bring significant financial implications, even for small timeframe over runs.
It is considered that consequential impacts of the Discount Regulations on the budget can be managed through carefully managing timeframes on notified files. Small discounts on non-notified files that may be paid are not likely to be of consequence. .
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
The potential effect of the Discount Regulations needs to be considered as part of the Annual Plan process. .
Melanie Pullar Water Administration Officer
18 August 2010
$100907RM Odecisi onsgr.1950.0823105635$ $100907Graphofincomin.1950.0823105642$
30
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201
! " ! " # $%!$&% %
%& '() * ) + , - . /. 0 - & 1 . # 2( $%!$&% % /). % 3 4 5 + , - 5 - ! 2( # 2( $%!$&% % 32 6.(7 ')(( ) 7 &8 0 6 9, 8%# :/.# 19 $%!$&% %
88 " 2( ) 9 4 / 2 : 3( # : # . &%$%!$&% % +. . %! 4, ;( + )/ ')(( 9 ( 5) 0 6 9, &# 9(9 +. 4 9 &%$%!$&% % 7 ) ( . ! < = ( ')(( ) 7 <(. ) < # + <.$<9 &%$%!$&% %
! : < 0 9( ')(( ) 9 ( 7 8 6. # : & $%!$&% % - + .)) %% < =( < ) 9 ) : / # +. &&$%!$&% % )) , 9 9 / (5 ) / > 3 ( ) 9 - --(. = .. # <, &&$%!$&% % /). 8 2( 4. < )9 / ')(( ) 7 8 0 # <, &&$%!$&% %
= 5. ) ?) @ ) ( . 3 - &8$%!$&% % ) . . ) 2" . ) 9 ), --(. ! : # : &$%!$&% % , . ) % 3( 0, (() ) 9 ) , - 7 :) ) <( # 4/.# . &$%!$&% % ( / . 7. - 9 <. 0
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
+9 (( = + . , - 9 .(. 8&8 :( 3 9 # < %$%$&% % 39 )) + .) - ) / & * ) ) 9 --(. ( %% 9. # <, %$%$&% % . )
A509201 % 2.) 0( /, 6% + , & ( # + , $%$&% %
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
A509201 & = *( 0( /, 2% : < # : $%$&% %
< ) 28 : % # : $%$&% %
% 2 = *@ = / 6! + , &%8 0/ # + , $%$&% % , > + // 0( /, 6 + , &8 0/ # + , $%$&% %
8 3()) >.)) ) 9 / .( 39 <( # =. =.. $%$&% % 5( ( /. ) )) , 9 ). - / / )/ / / +1 0( /, 6&% + , 0/ # + , $%$&% %
- <( ( <( .) , ) . ) ) &%$%$&% % 3. ( 9 7 ) - .# # 9.# # ,9 .# + , # : # : # + /.# : 9 & 0 2 () ) 9 --(. /). &% + = # + <. &%$%$&% % +. 3 3. ( " 9, ) 5 ) = < ) 5# 0.(/9. < # +. &%$%$&% % ) / ( = .))(( ')(( ) 7 && ,) # < &%$%$&% %
! 3 .) * ) ) 9 --(. /). 9. # <, & $%$&% % ! 0, * ( + .) ) 9 --(. & ( # < & $%$&% % ( $) && 20 = 6. * ( ')(( ) 7 !% < )/ 5# > & $%$&% % + .) 2 :& ) 9 --(. /). +. # 49 &!$%$&% % & 3(( ) / " # &!$%$&% % !!% (. 6( ) 3 . 9, ) / (. D. # +. # 19 &$%$&% % C.
A509201 8 * ) + .) 3) . ) ,(( 1 5.# 9 &$%$&% %
8 + )) . 2 : 8 # : &$%$&% %
! 2* 2 =)) 0( /, 6&% + , 1 # + , &$%$&% %
6 1( 5 2! : # : &$%$&% %
0 2, 0( /, 6 8 + , & 0/ # + , &$%$&% %
6 ( 3 9. 39 - # 9. &$%$&% %
1 0 < / () 8& 0 6 9, 8%# &$%$&% % 7) 8 <,(( + , - 1 9 0 &% 1( ")# > &$%$&% % - - ) / &%& =. ) 9 ), --(. ( # + , &$%$&% % . ) & > 24 :E(( 2! : # : &$%$&% %
& > / 2 : &8 0/ 0 # : &$%$&% %
&8 395 4, ;( ')(( ) 7 ) 2 5 # - # =. =.. 8 $%$&% % &! 7 +9 * ( + .) ')(( ) 7 " / ) : 9 # % + = # + <. 8 $%$&% %
! 0 * ) <, ) 9 - --(. & & :( 3 9 # <, % $%$&% % /). 1) - <( 0 , ) 9 ./ ) + >/ : + 6. ) 5# 9 5.# + % $%$&% % ) 3. ( <. % +9 < / ) - +9 + , - 9 > . 5 - 0 6 9, 88# +9 29 ( * ( %8$%$&% % 3 ( ) / 5 , - 7 (( /. /)) & 2( : 9 ) + . , - !% :( 3 9 # <, %8$%$&% % < )9 / - ) / 4, ;( + )/ (( , 5) 5 7 9() 0 6 9, & .), @ %8$%$&% % ) 9 +. 6 7. - =./. 9 6 # +.
A509201 &88 +9 =.9 + .) ) 9 ) --(. . F 0 6 9, 8%# %8$%$&% % ) &!8 - <( ( ')(( . , 7 ) 8!8 0/ # + , :.( :3 / %8$%$&% % 3. ( . # ! 0/ 0/ # + , & ! + = 2 8 . 8! ) # 49# . %!$%$&% %
& ) . ! !3 + . # : *(()# . %!$%$&% %
& 1 < / . 8 >,9 < # >,9 < # . %!$%$&% %
& = / 8% & 0 6 9, 8%# %!$%$&% %
&&% 2 1 ) . % 1 . # 49# . %!$%$&% %
&& = > (( &! 2.( # : *(()# . %!$%$&% %
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
A509201 &%! A 2) ? , ) , 9 9 1 & ) # 1 $%$&% % 5 / 9 9 9 / )). ) / / & & 21 1( ) 9 --(. / ! . . # + <. $%$&% % ) &&8 * / ! . 1 . # 49# . $%$&% % 1) &&! 3 3/7(( . ! < , # 49# . $%$&% %
8% *) * ) ) 9 --(. /). & 0 6 9, # . !$%$&% % . ) 3. ( + ) 9 9 ( -(. F + , # >. . < # . !$%$&% % /.7( &&& 2 >+ <( 2! 7)9 2! # : !$%$&% % : 8 . 0 29 ( + ) 9 9 ( -(. 88% 8!% :( +./ # . $%$&% % 0 - ) 9 &8 +. 3 3. ( ) 9 9 & ) 5# =. =.. $%$&% % 9 ( C. - - 9 /. /) - ( ..( /) ) - 7 & 4 < ) 9 ) --(. # ,9 . $%$&% %
&8 ) :5 5) * ( + . , - ! : # " .7 & $%$&% % + .) - ) / & . ) 3. ( ')(( . , 7 ) =,9 # & $%$&% %
& : 6 9) ')(( ) 7 8 3( ) 3 )) # :/ & $%$&% %
&% 1) - <( " 9, ) - / 5) 19 # 19 &&$%$&% % ) 3. ( & % +9 < / ) - +9 29 ( @/( 0 6 9, 88# . &&$%$&% % 3 7( ) & :+<< 4; * ) * ) 9 5) )/ / + . <( # : *(()# . &&$%$&% % '5)) ) - /( - ) & 19 ) 3. ( 1 ) )(( /, 7@ =. ) 5# !% =. , 5# 19 &8$%$&% %
A509201 &! +. 3 3. ( F, )) , 9 2 5.# =. =.. &!$%$&% % 9, ) & +. 3 3. ( + . , - / ( +9 0 # 3 ( +. # +. &!$%$&% % , ) . ) ) 9 , ( - , 9 ) ,9 , (( 9 +. 6 7. 5 9 +. 3 3. ( ) , )) &8 / - / 6& + +/9 ) 5# + , &$%$&% % 3) 5 8& 4, ;( + )/ " 9, ) ) , ) 9 0 6 9, &# 7, +./ >. < &$%$&% % - ./ )# // @ ( ( ) 9 - > ! + = 6( ) 3 . 9, ) - / && 9 # + =9 &$%$&% %
! ( 19 + , - > . 5 - &% > . 5 # + <. &$%$&% % - ) / &% 19 ) 3. ( 3) . .) 7 / " - " 5 ) # 19 &$%$&% % )/)# (. / 5 ) ./ )/ 9 3)( = &8& 19 ) 3. ( ?/ )) 7 5 9 19 , 3(.7# # @ &$%$&% % 19 5 0 6 9, 8% 7 19 &! ( 6(9 ' ( //( - %% 19 ( < # )$).) - &$%$&% % = . A (( & 6D 1) 7 ')(( ) 7 &8 =9. # # &# > &$%$&% %
&% 6 6 + .) ')(( ) 7 0 6 9, 8# = 9# 19 . &$%$&% %
% = ')(( .) .(5 ) 1 9 # &$%$&% % )) 5 . 7. - 9 5 &! = 2 6./9 )# " 0( /, 6 & + , 8 ( # + , &$%$&% % 0( 2.) &8 3 : 9 ) ')(( ) 7 6 # > &$%$&% %
&& :+<< 4, ;( * ) 6 5) )/ / ) - 49. * )# 7, > * ) 8%$%$&% % '5)) /( - ) 19 * )
A509201 &8 1 ( ) " 9, ) - 9 .(. ( = .. # <, 8%$%$&% % 5(/ & + 19. /. ) 9 ) --(. . 0 6 9, 8# + >9 8%$%$&% % 0 9( - + .)) ) & 6 9 + .) ) 9 )/ --(. 0/ # + , % $%$&% % ) 9) &! ( ) ) 9 )/ --(. (, 3 # >/ 0 # =. %&$%$&% % ) 9) &!& 3 3 A , ) 9 --(. ( &8 3(( ) # + <. %$%$&% % / ) &! 2 ))5( * ( + .) ) 9 --(. /). 8! 0 6 9, &# <,# + <. %$%$&% % < )9 / && :/ ) 3. ( " 9, ) - :9 , 6 7. :9 , 6 7. # :9 , %$%$&% % ,(, & =) 2!! : # : %$%$&% %
!% +. = 0 "@ 5 7 ( - > 9 (( 5# 0.(/9. < # +. %$%$&% % ' , 9 9 9 +. = ).-- /9 - (( 5 && 0 >/( * ( 5 = 0 , 9 ) 5# ,9 . %$%$&% % + .) &8 * 1 () ! ! 0 6 9, 88# : *(() %$%$&% %
&% 0 < :5 (( ) 9 --(. / ! 1 () 4 9# < %$%$&% % ( ) & +, * ) ) 9 --(. /). % +. # >9 %$%$&% % &8 :+<< 4, ;( * ) 9 5) 5 ) ( 1 * )# 1 9 A(( # :/ &$%$&% % 9 5) )/ / ) - /( - ) & 377 + * ')(( ) 7 !8 # :/. &$%$&% % && 3 , * ) 2 ./# * ) 9 5) 5 ) ( :/. * )# , 9 .9 1 2 # 8 8$%$&% % = ) - .(. 9 5) )/ / ) - ( ) - :/ * ) /( - ) & 9 8! & 2.( # : *(()# . 8$%$&% %
A509201 %8 3 < ) + .) ) 9 --(. /). 8 0, # >9 !$%$&% % & +9 + .) ) 9 )/ --(. % 3. ) # !$%$&% % ) 9) ! . ) 3. ( <( # .) -( ) 9 ) 5# = (( # : & $%$&% % / - /.7( ( .) &8 +. 3 3. ( 3 . 9, ) / ( > # <) <# +. & $%$&% % ) 9 ) , ) . , , ) 5 ) &! <. * ) ) 9 . - 8 1,.. # =. &&$%$&% % --(. . ) /). ) 9 / )(. ( 8 +.,9 + 4 + .) ')(( 9 ( 7 , ')( # +. 6 7. &&$%$&% %
8 +.,9 + 4 + .) ')(( 9 ( 7 , ')( # +. 6 7. &&$%$&% %
! , "' 1 ) ) 9 ) , ( ,9 + 0 # =. =.. &$%$&% % +. 6 7. 8& 3 0 ) ) 9 )/ --(. %& 6. # 6. &$%$&% % ) 9) &! 49 9 + .) / %& ! 0 6 9, 8%# &$%$&% %
& 2 -- * ) ) 9 . - & . . # + <. &$%$&% % --(. . ) /). ) 9 / )(. ( 8%! :+<< 4, ;( * ) 9 5) 5 ) ( +. * )# >9. # =9 &$%$&% % '5)) 9 5) )/ / ) - /( - )H &! = = 3 )),(( + 9 ( 9 5 ,9( & 0/9 0 # . &$%$&% % 9 @ 9 - ) .) & 1) - <( " 9, ) , )( * 8 H8 ( ) ( 0- 9 # &$%$&% % ) 3. ( 9 8& * C.9 * ( + .) ) 9 )/ --(. 6 +. # 6. &$%$&% % ) 9) & A + .) ) 9 --(. / &&%% 0 6 9, &# + <. 8%$%$&% % ) /). ) 9 --(. )( ) (
A509201 & : / .)9( ) ) 9 --(. /). . # : / %&$%$&% % % )5 (( * ) ) 9 --(. / 8 =.. 0 # =. %!$%$&% % ) /). 8 6. + .) ) 9 )/ --(. 19 5# 2 )7 < # %!$%$&% % ) 9) 8& G " 6 ) ')(( ) 7 8 A # 1 $+. %!$%$&% %
& ) ) + , - 9 / ) 8! 0 6 9, 8!# :/. %$%$&% % * )9/ < . & 09, * ( + .) ) 9 ) , ( ! 0 6 9, &# +. %$%$&% %
88% ., * ) ')(( ) 7 ! + > 5# + <. %$%$&% %
88 =1 " )9, ) 9 )/ --(. ! > . 0 # =. %$%$&% % ) 9) 88 4, ;( + )/ 2 9 ( 5) 7 9() + . 5 &! * -9 5.# +. %$%$&% % !8 + () * ( + .) + 9 - 7 - ( 9 <. 0 # . %$%$&% % ( 9 8% 60 ) 9 )/ --(. & 0.9 # =. %$%$&% % ) 9) 8% < '5) ) 9 )/ --(. 8! 0/ # + , %$%$&% % = ) 9) 888 < : ( 4, ;( ')(( 9 ($ 7 ) & 49 # 49# . %$%$&% % 88 > ). ) , 7 ) &! . # > %$%$&% %
88 + + .) + 9 5 ,9( 9 1( 0 # . %$%$&% % @ 9 / 5 ). - 9 - ) .) & 3( / % + . # # . %$%$&% %
& 2 * )9 &! . = # 49# . %$%$&% %
8! ) * ( + .) ')(( ) 9 ( 7 ! <... 0 # . %$%$&% %
A509201 8! )9/ + .) ')(( ) 7 )9 < # ,9 . %$%$&% %
8& = 5 ( ')(( ) 7 8% 1 ((.97 # > %$%$&% %
! + 1 1 ) 9 --(. /). 7 1)# 6 9 # . $%$&% % 8!% > 0 9 ')(( ) 7 %8 4 8 # + <. $%$&% %
! = > 1 ) + , - + , 5 - + , 5 # 9 - 0 6 9, & 7 # &$%$&% % /). = & 6 ) 9 )/ --(. *) # : *(() 8$%$&% % )9( 8!& +. 3 3. ( + . , - / ( 1 0 # =./.# +. 8$%$&% % , ) . ) ) 9 , ( - , 9 ) ,9 , (( 9 +. 6 7. 5 9 +. 3 3. ( ) , )) 8 = ( ')(( ) 7 &% ) 5# > 8$%$&% %
! # " & 8 +. 3 3. ( I 39) ) . /( 0.(/9. < # +. & $%!$&% % +. = 0 ' %8 +. 3 3. ( 39 59 ( ) ) * )9 ) 19 -# 5 3 ) # +. & $%!$&% % ./ ) 8& 4 +.,9 39 ) & ( 8 , + 5 +) 0(. &$%!$&% % 29 ( ))) / - @ 9 , < )# >, . &!&%& 03 6 .) () 39 /. /) - ) *( 9 5.# >, . %8$%$&% % ) 9 5 H ((, 9 //( 5(/ ( ) - 9 - 9 // 9 --(.
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
A509201 +. 3 3. ( .9 ) @ ) ) . . ) 9 =./.# +. 6 7. %8$%$&% % 3)( = +. 3 3. ( .9 ) @ ) ) . . ) 9 =.# +. 6 7. %8$%$&% % 3)( = 8 *= 67 + . , - % 2.(( 5 # < &&$%$&% % - ) / +. 3 3. ( .9 ) @ ) ) . . ) 9 :. # +. 6 7. %$%$&% % 3)( = +. 3 3. ( .9 ) @ ) ) . . ) 9 1( # +. 6 7. %$%$&% % 3)( = ! +. 3 3. ( 3) . ./ ),(() 9 =.$:. # +. 6 7. %$%$&% % 3)( = & +. 3 3. ( 3) . ./ ),(() 9 =.$:. # +. 6 7. %$%$&% % 3)( = "
%! 3 6( 6 5 3) . /./ ) ) 9 19 5 # >/ # 19 %8$%$&% % ) , 9 19 5 # "
!& A 39 ) 7 7 && ,) # < &!$%$&% % ) 9 C. - , - #&% 8#%% .7 ) /
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201 Chart1
Application and Decision Tracking
90
80
70
60 Incoming Applications
50 Decisions Files Files 40 Applications (6 month moving average) 30 Decisions (6 month moving average) 20
10
0
-07 -07 -07 -07 -08 -08 -08 -08 -09 -09 -09 -09 -10 -10 -10 -10 n b n l n b n l n b n l n b n l Ju Ju Ju Ju Ja Fe Mar-07Apr-07May-07Ju Aug-07Sep-07Oct-07Nov-07Dec-07Ja Fe Mar-08Apr-08May-08Ju Aug-08Sep-08Oct-08Nov-08Dec-08Ja Fe Mar-09Apr-09May-09Ju Aug-09Sep-09Oct-09Nov-09Dec-09Ja Fe Mar-10Apr-10May-10Ju Month/Year
Page 1
A509201
A509201
File Reference: 4.00096 Significance of Decision: Low
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Warwick Murray, Group Manager Land Management
Review of progress with Feral Goat Management in the Eastern Bay of Plenty
Executive Summary
Earlier this year Wildland Consultants Limited completed a review of Council’s Eastern Bay of Plenty feral goat management programme. The reviewer concluded that “Significant gains and advances have been made since 2005”. The reviewer also made a number of recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the programme, primarily around operational coordination between the various agencies involved in goat control. This report provides an overview of the key findings and the review’s recommendations.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Review of progress with Feral Goat Management in the Eastern Bay of Plenty.
2 Notes that substantial progress has been made in managing goats within the eastern Bay of Plenty since 2005.
3 Confirms that the significance of the decision has been assessed as LOW, and under Section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) confirms that in light of the level of significance of the decision it does not require: (a) Further identification and assessment of different options under section 77 LGA; (b) Further investigation or consideration of community views under section 78 LGA; (c) Any further written record of the manner in which section 77 and section 78 matters have been addressed.
2 Introduction
The Bay of Plenty Regional Pest Strategy 2003 – 2008 (RPMS) (which is still operative) classifies feral goats as “Progressive Control Pest Animals”. The RPMS’s objective for these pests is: “Reduction of current populations to levels where indigenous biodiversity is not threatened by way of a regional management plan”.
In accordance with the RPMS, a plan was developed for feral goat management focusing on the Eastern Bay of Plenty i.e. lands of all tenure east of the Rangitaiki
31
A509201 Review of progress with Feral Goat Management in the Eastern Bay of Plenty
River to Cape Runaway, extending from the coast inland to the catchment boundaries. This plan was written in 2005 by Wildland Consultants Limited, and sets out long term goals and objectives based on an overview of the extent of the problem, the values under threat and a pragmatic approach to dealing with the problem.
The plan was developed in consultation with Department of Conservation (DOC), Nga Whenua Rahui (NWR) and Gisborne District Council (GDC); all of which are currently involved in goat control operations. While it has not been formally adopted by these agencies, the plan is not inconsistent with their current approaches.
The plan is underpinned by the Wild Animal Control Act, National Park Act, Conservation Act, rules relating to goat farming contained in District Plans and rules within our RPMS.
We have been working to this plan since 2005; given this, and as part of the RPMS review, it was considered timely to review the programme. The review was completed earlier this year by Wildlands Consultants Limited.
This report highlights progress made and identified by the reviewer and an overview of recommendations made.
3 Background to the Plan
The Plan identified goat infestations over approximately 233,000 hectares of the Eastern Bay of Plenty. Roughly half the infested area is within Crown lands administered by DOC. These infestations pose significant threats to the biodiversity values of Te Urewera National Park and large tracts of the Raukumara Ranges as these areas have never been infested with goats. Within the infested areas, goats are impacting on the ecological values of the sites they inhabit.
The High level goals of the plan are:
• Maintain goat-free status of areas of indigenous vegetation where goats are not currently present.
• Eradicate goats from strategically important outlier areas within five years.
• Eradicate goats from the management area within 50 areas.
To assist with prioritisation and planning the management area was initially divided into 16 management units (MU’s). The MU’s are based on ecological character, geographic barriers and the scale of goat infestation (see figure 3 attached). The goat issues, ecological values, control history were described for each MU. The plan also recommended priorities, management objectives, actions required, roles and responsibilities, methods and timeframes for each MU.
4 Key findings of the review
The reviewer found that significant gains and advances have been made since 2005 in terms of the removal or reduction of feral goat infestations. These gains are largely due to the allocation of appropriate resourcing to the various MU’s, in particular, credit must be given to DOC for their commitment and tenacity in tackling large goat infestations in the Otara catchment areas. The most significant gains include:
• Elimination of localised infestations on the western side of Te Urewera National Park (with the significant exception of ongoing issues with one adjacent farm);
32
A509201 Review of progress with Feral Goat Management in the Eastern Bay of Plenty
• Eradication of the Kiwinui infestation;
• Significant reduction of the Kereu-Te Waiti infestation;
• Eradication of the localised populations on the western side of the Waioweka River;
• Very significant reduction of the infestation in the middle Waioweka, between the Kotepato Stream and the southern regional boundary;
• Establishment of a managed buffer on the western side of the lower Motu River;
• Establishment of a managed buffer on the eastern side of the Waioweka River/SH2;
• Major reductions in goat numbers and densities within the Otara catchment;
• Significant reduction of numbers on the eastern side of the Motu River;
• Increased levels of control on the western and eastern sides of the Raukokore River.
A summary of progress in each MU is attached to this report.
Major advances in implementing and managing operations were also identified. For example, DOC has streamlined the use of GPS to track hunting operations. This information is then used to target further hunter effort. They have also established vegetation monitoring to measure the current goat effects and programme outcomes See figures 1 and 2.
Figure 1- Newly established Exclosure Plot, Wahaatua Stream, 2000
33
A509201 Review of progress with Feral Goat Management in the Eastern Bay of Plenty
Figure 2 – Wahaatua Exclosure Plot being re-measured in 2008
BOPRC, with DOC, have also refined the use of “judas” goats techniques (a radio- collared goat which guides hunters to surviving goats) for local eradications. Council is currently investigating the use of GPS collars and satellite telemetry, which enable “real-time” tracking of ‘judas’’ animals and further reduce monitoring and hunter effort and costs.
The two key areas where improvements could be made to goat control in the Eastern Bay of Plenty identified by the reviewer were:
• The need for ongoing operational coordination across a range of land tenures;
• The importance of enabling, clear, supportive, and consistent approaches to goat control on private lands in regional and district plans.
5 Review Recommendations
The review makes eight recommendations:
1. Implement the plan for feral goat control.
2. Implement annual coordination meetings with all agencies involved in goat control.
3. Organise planner meetings with relevant regional council, district council and DOC planners to update them on progress and any requirements in relation to relevant planning documents, including district and regional plans, and regional policy statements.
34
A509201 Review of progress with Feral Goat Management in the Eastern Bay of Plenty
4. Adopt standardised system for information recording, including the following:
• management units (as per this document);
• subdivision of larger management units into manageable hunting blocks;
• GPS recording of kills/unit hunted;
• type(s) of control undertaken/unit;
• methods and personnel utilised for control;
• costs incurred/unit, on an annual basis;
• standardised recording of tasks/activities, e.g. aerial shooting, aerial survey, ground control, ground survey, judas monitoring, judas hunting, operational research);
• status of remaining goat population.
5. Evaluate merits of having a shared database for management of above information.
6. A project of this scale requires a degree of leadership, as well as facilitation, with two types of leadership required:
• management implementation within defined geographic units, and
• overall project liaison and coordination, across lands of all tenure.
7. Continue to monitor and actively investigate advances in technology that have the potential to result in material advances in the cost-effectiveness of feral goat control, e.g. real-time GPS data loggers and/or transmitters.
8. Continue to utilise ‘Judas’ goats in the ‘final’ stages of eradication operations, to detect and eliminate residual infestation pockets.
Staffs first step to implementing these recommendations will be meet with other goat control agencies with the aim of reaching formal agreement on an integrated control plan.
6 Financial Implications
Current Budget
The Eastern Bay of Plenty is funded through our Biosecurity Programme. DOC, NWR and GDC also provide funding for operations they manage. .
Future Implications
No Implications
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
No Implications
35
A509201 Review of progress with Feral Goat Management in the Eastern Bay of Plenty
Greg Corbett Manager Land Resources (Rotorua)
for Group Manager Land Management
18 August 2010
$Strategicrevi ewoffer.1948.0818025918$ $summaryofprogress tod.1948.0818030739$
36
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201 !16
!17 !15 !14 !18 !13
Legend Feral Goat Management Area BoP Regional Boundary Management Units !12a !1 Western Te Urewera !2 Kiwinui !3 Ohope-Waiotane-Taneatua Hiwarau !4 Western Side of Waiotahe Valley 2 !5 Lower Waiotahe (eastern side) and Waioeka River ! 12b 11b ! 6 Small Pockets on Western Side of the Waioeka River 3 ! ! ! !6a Mid-reaches and Headwaters of the Kotepato Catchment 10 ! 12c !7 Eastern Side of the Waioeka Catchment 5 9 !11a ! ! ! !8 Upper Otara Catchment !4 19 ! !9 Norhern Buffer to Lower Otara-Waioeka Catchments !10 Eastern Side of Lower Otara Catchment to Coast !11a Toatoa to Motu River (Extending to Coast) !11b Toatoa to Motu River (Extending to Coast) !12a East of Motu River !8 12b 7 ! East of Motu River ! 12c !6 ! East of Motu River !13 Kereu/Te Waiti Catchments !14 West of Raukokore River !15 East of Raukokore !1 !16 Cape Runaway !17 Waikura-Lottin Point 6a ! !18 Rip-Pakihiroa !19 Mangaotane-Ruatahunga Lead Agencies Department of Conservation Environment Bay of Plenty Gisborne District Council Nga Whenua Rahui and Department of Conservation Nga Whenua Rahui and Environment Bay of Plenty
Figure 3. Goat Management Units and Lead Agencies within the Eastern Bay of Plenty Scale: 1:450,000 Feral Goat Management Area Date: 29/06/09 0 10 20 40 Cartographer: MR ³ km Format: A3 E:\gis\2173 EBOP Goat Review\Fig3Goat Management_unitsb.mxd
A509201
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201 Summary of progress to date
The Strategic Management of Feral Goats between the Rangitaiki River and Cape Runaway plan divides the management area up into 19 Management Units (MU’s), see figure 1. Table 1 summarises the recommended objectives and progress with each MU.
Table 1
Management objective (and agencies MU Problem Progress involved)
1 Small numbers encroaching Te Eliminate goat population before they Enforcement action taken against farms. Low level Urewera from adjoining farms. establish. (DOC) risk of farm escapees still present.
2 Recent established population. Eradicate by 2005. (EBOP) Achieved – no goats sighted since 2005. Moderate numbers.
3 Scattered, but generally low Coordinate goat management with Scoping of extent of problem and landowner numbers. Some goat farming. landowners. Remove goats from attitudes currently in progress. protected areas by 2024. (EBOP)
4 & 5 Scattered low numbers. Issues Reduce to zero density by 2010. Ensure Significant progress made. Feral population at with escapees from farms. goat farms adequately contain farmed very low levels. Still risk of escapees from 4 farms. animals. (EBOP/DOC)
6 Small dispersed pockets of Eradicate feral population and enforce Achieved – no feral goats sighted since 2007 and goats posing significant risk to goat farming controls by 2008 no goat farming in area. Te Urewera NP. (EBOP/DOC)
6a Small numbers in dispersed Eliminate current infestation and respond Significant progress made - Good relationships pockets. Risk of invasion from to any sightings by 2012. (DOC/GDC) with Gisborne landowners but persistent sightings. GDC.
7 Relatively low population. Reduce and maintain at very low numbers Significant progress made - currently under by 2014 and eradicate by 2025. (DOC) surveillance.
A509201 8 & 9 High goat population over large Reduce population to low levels by 2008 While objective have not been achieved, DOC areas. and aim to eradicate by 2050. (DOC with have made excellent progress given the scale of some support from GDC and EBOP) the problem.
10 Moderate infestations with Reduce to low numbers by 2015 and Control in early stages. locally high numbers eradicate by 2050. (DOC)
11 Large population over large Reduce to low levels by 2020. To date only targeted control taken place to protect areas. (NWR/BOPRC) NWR kawenata sites.
12 Low population but very high Reduce to very low numbers 2010 and Significant progress made. This area has been a priority as direct threat to goat- zero density by 2015. (DOC) strong focus for DOC. free Raukumara’s.
13 A small isolated satellite Eradicate by 2008. (NWR) Significant progress made initially, but still some population. difficulties removing remaining survivors.
14 Low populations Reduce to zero density by 2009 (NWR / Landowner negotiations completed. Control BOPRC) operations will commence in 2010.
15 Locally moderate populations Eradicate by 2020 (NWR/BOPRC) Landowner negotiations in progress, aiming to commence control 2010/11.
16 Low numbers Eradicate by 2006 (BOPRC/NWR) Significant progress made – it was believed that objective had been achieved, however a local landowner brought in a small population of goats.
17 Low to moderate numbers. Maintain at very low numbers Proposed new MU. (BOPRC/NWR/GDC)
18 Low numbers Maintain at very low numbers (DOC/GDC) Proposed new MU.
19 High numbers posing Reduce to and maintain at low numbers Proposed new MU. significant threat to (DOC) management area.
A509201
File Reference: 3.00135 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Ken Tarboton, Group Manager Rivers and Drainage
August 2010 Flood Event
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with information on the 13 th – 16 th August 2010 storm event. The storm generated up to 349 mm of rain in some eastern catchments with river flows ranging from 5 year return period floods in most rivers to a 30 year flood in the Whakat āne River. This report contains rainfall and river flow data, actions undertaken and results of those actions and emphasises the professional management of the flood event which resulted in no houses flooded, no stock losses and floodwaters quickly removed. The report also indicates key issues and impacts to the flood protection schemes that will require follow up actions.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, August 2010 Flood Event.
2 Event Summary
At 8:25am Friday 13 th 2010 August Metservice issued the first heavy rain warning for the event with predictions of up to 280mm of rain in the ranges and up to 130mm in lower lying areas. Falls were expected to occur from 6:00pm Friday 13 th until 3:00pm Sunday 15 th . Heavy swells were also forecast together with spring tides.
By Saturday evening 14 th August 2010 rainfall in the Eastern Ranges had reached totals of up to 260mm with Metservice updating their forecast and predicting another 120mm to 180mm in the ranges overnight and into the morning of Sunday 15 th August.
By mid morning Sunday 15 th August, maximum rainfall totals for the event had reached 339mm in the Waimana catchment with overnight accumulations less than forecast.
The event was not notable in terms of rainfall in isolation with a maximum of 5 - 10 year return period rainfalls recorded. However there had been significant rainfall totals for August. Compared to historical data for August, with recorded totals the highest on record for a number of sites in the eastern catchments (refer table 1). This was on top of a relatively wet July for some of the catchments. Because catchment soils were saturated there was an increase portion of runoff since the soil had very little available storage to absorb the rain (refer table 2). 37
A509201 August 2010 Flood Event
Rivers in the Eastern Bay peaked overnight Saturday with the exception of the Rangit āiki which peaked Monday afternoon due to the controlled releases from Matahina Dam. The Rangit āiki River peak was attenuated through proactive drawdown at Matahina Dam.
Peak river flows in the rivers ranged as follows;
• 2 – 5 year: Otara, Waioeka, Waimana and Kaituna Rivers
• 5 – 10 year: Rangit āiki River (including dam attenuation)
• 30 year: Whakat āne River
Table 1. Rainfall Statistics for selected periods in August 2010 at selected stations.
Rainfall 13 -15 Rainfall Total 1 - 17 Rainfall Total 1 -17 Rainfall Total 13 – August 2010 Site Name August 2010 August 2010 15 August 2010 Average compared to Recurrence Interval (mm) historical rainfall for month August (mm)
Otara at Tutaetoko 589 Highest since 242 5 -10 year records began (1990) Waioeka at 658 Highest since 256 2 – 5 year Cableway records began (1990) Whakat āne at 402 Highest since 199 5 – 10 year Huiteike records began (1978) Waimana at Ranger 766 Highest since 338 10 year Station records began (1990) Rangit āiki at Waihua 304 129 < 2 year
Table 2. Peak River Flow Statistics at selected sites for 13 -16 August 2010 event.
Peak Flow between Peak Flow Comparative 100 year th Site Name 13 – 16 August flow Average Recurrence (cumecs) Interval (cumecs)
Otara at Browns Bridge 430 5 year 928
Waioeka at Cableway 799 < 5 year 1695
Whakat āne at Valley 2174 30 year 2820 Rd
Waimana at Ranger 280 5 year 560 (50 year) Station
5 – 10 year (with attenuation) Rangit āiki at Te Teko 375 780 10 – 20 year (without attenuation)
38
A509201 August 2010 Flood Event
3 Flood Management
Following Metservice warnings for the Eastern Bay of Plenty for the weekend starting on Friday 13 August, the flood team was activated to ensure systems and staff were available to deal with flood releated issues. Pre emptive first warnings were put out for the Otara, Waioeka, Waimana and Whakat āne rivers on Friday 13 th August to allow farmers to move stock to higher ground before nightfall.
On Saturday 14 th August second warnings were put out for all the Eastern Bay rivers along with first warnings on the Rangit āiki and Kaituna Rivers. Stoplogs were installed at sites on the Whakat āne River and tributary canals on Saturday night in preparation for the high tide at 11:00am Sunday morning that would coincide with the flood peak in the Whakat āne River. Refer figures 1 and 2 and Appendix 1.
Figure 1. Stoplogs in place. Whakat āne River Boat Ramp
Figure 2. Flooding around Wharf Shed Restaurant on river side of stoplogs.
39
A509201 August 2010 Flood Event
Forecast river flow modelling was undertaken during the day of Saturday 15 th August, and predictions communicated to Civil Defence Emergency Management Staff.
On Saturday 15 th August, at the Regional Council Flood Managers request, Trustpower commenced spilling from the Matahina Dam to reduce the dam to its minimum operating level. Spilling was increased through to Monday 16 th August to manage the inflows using the dam as storage. It is estimated that the peak outflow from the dam was reduced from a 10 – 20 year event to a 5 – 10 year event in the Rangit āiki River as a result of this controlled management. Good cooperation occurred with Trustpower staff throughout the entire event.
Low level stopbanks on the Waioeka and Whakat āne Rivers were over topped resulting in flooding of low lying land in these catchments.
The flood management team remained operational through until the afternoon of Monday 16 th August when all the rivers had peaked.
Operations staff continued emergency pumping and implementing measures to relieve floodwaters trapped behind low level stopbanks through until Wednesday 18 th August.
4 Key Issues
The fuse at the Whakat āne River mouth fuse did not break until after high tide on Sunday morning (refer Appendix 1). Observations show that we are still concerned about the effects of the western training wall on flow dynamics and how and when the spit functions. Further modelling and analysis work will need to be undertaken collaboratively with Whakat āne District Council to address the concerns.
A partial breach of the stopbanks occurred on the Te Rahu Canal on Sunday morning. Actions to repair the breach continued through Sunday with a successful closure around 6:30pm. Additional pumps were brought in to remove floodwaters as a result of the breach. These were setup and pumping by 11:00pm on Sunday night.
The breach was initially observed by members of the public who indicated that the flow started from a rabbit hole in the stopbank. The breach scoured to about 15 metres wide and cut to approx halfway to ground level where a hard layer impeded further erosion of the stopbank. This allowed the repair to be effected without the full volume of the canal being lost (figure 3).
Low level stopbanks on the Whakat āne River were overtopped entrapping floodwaters behind them. Numerous calls were received by Regional Council staff requesting action to reduce this flooding. On Monday afternoon a controlled cut was undertaken on the Jones’ property to release floodwaters. Trapped floodwater at other sites discharged relatively quickly through existing culvert structures.
Controlled spilling of excess floodwaters from the Te Rahu Canal into the Te Rahu ponding area occurred during Sunday as designed. Additional pumps were deployed to the ponding area on Monday and all ponded water was removed by Wednesday.
40
A509201 August 2010 Flood Event
Figure 3. Te Rahu Canal Partial Breach. Undertaking repair.
5 Effectiveness of Flood Management Response
Seven families were evacuated in the Fortunes Road basin due to the partial breach on the Te Rahu Canal. This evacuation was managed by Whakat āne District Council Emergency Operations Centre following advice from Regional Council Flood Managers.
There were no reports of flooding to homes across the Eastern Bay of Plenty. Some garages were flooded due to localised drainage problems.
No reports of stock losses have been reported. Farmers acted on warnings early and moved stock to higher ground.
Additional pumps (12 pumps) were brought into the area on Sunday 15 th August and were deployed as soon as appropriate. By Wednesday most flood water had been removed with the confidence that grasses will recover in areas where silt is not too deep.
6 Communications and Community Response
Regular situation updates were communicated internally and to other authorities during the event.
Regular media releases were undertaken and Regional Council communications team made themselves available for media contact during the event.
Comments have been received from the community that the response to the flood was undertaken in a professional, efficient and effective manner.
41
A509201 August 2010 Flood Event
7 Lessons Learned
A number of issues will require future follow up including documentation of where lessons have been learned from the flood event.
Staff initiated an exercise with Lake Aniwhenua while flows were high to gather information on the effects of lake level on upstream flooding. These results are being communicated to stakeholders. Close coordination with Bay of Plenty Energy occurred throughout the event and to instigate this exercise.
The Te Rahu Canal partial breach will require investigation and confirmation as to why it failed. Additional animal pest eradication and monitoring may need to be undertaken if deemed appropriate.
The Whakat āne spit fuse management needs to be investigated with responsibilities clearly defined and monitored for compliance.
8 Follow Up Flood Damage
A comprehensive inspection is being undertaken of all rivers and drainage schemes to assess flood damage. At this early stage, it appears some schemes have suffered significant and expensive flood damage which will require additional liaison meetings to discuss costs, decide actions and priorities for repairs.
9 Financial Implications
Current Budget
The financial costs of the flood management and response to this event have been carried out within existing budgets to date.
Future Implications
Separate reports will be brought to Council once future implications are known and discussions have taken place with scheme representatives.
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
No Ten Year Plan or Annual Plan implications at this stage.
Roger Waugh Principal Technical Engineer
for Group Manager Rivers and Drainage
20 August 2010
$ValleyR oadWhakataneW.1954.0830121318$
42
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201
Appendix 1.
Water levels on Whakatane River at the Valley Road recorder (in Black) and the Whakatane Wharf (in Red)
A509201
A509201
File Reference: 4.00209 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Eddie Grogan, Group Manager Water Management
Schedule of Complaints and Enforcement Activities: 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010
Executive Summary
This report covers complaints and enforcement activities for the three month period of 1 April 2010 through to 30 June 2010. During the period, 352 complaints were received, and 30 abatement notices and six infringement notices were issued. In addition, two prosecutions were concluded at the Hamilton District Court.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Schedule of Complaints and Enforcement Activities: 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010.
2 Introduction
A total of 352 complaints were registered over the 90 day reporting period, of which 54 percent were air related. The total number of complaints received during this period was about 25% less than the number received during the previous quarter, however was up 6% from the same quarter in 2009.
Six of the complaints received were classified as urgent, with all being actioned in less than three hours.
A total of 30 abatement and six infringement notices were issued during the reporting period, relating to a variety of consented and non-consented activities.
In early July, two cases were concluded at the District Court in Hamilton. Both related to unauthorised dairy effluent discharges in the Waitet ī Stream catchment, at Rotorua. A summary of each case is provided below.
3 Complaints
The following table highlights the breakdown of the Air Complaints into the three main air related categories for this period and compares to that of the previous four quarters. As can be seen, the figures for this quarter are very similar to the same period last
43
A509201 Schedule of Complaints and Enforcement Activities: 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010
year. Smoke related complaints are consistently the predominant category during all quarters.
Reporting Period Total Air Smoke Dust Odour Complaints 1 April to 30 June 2010 192 58% 12% 22% 1 January to 31 March 2010 274 46% 19% 30% 1 October to 31 December 2009 222 35% 27% 23% 1 July to 30 September 2009 197 49% 10% 24% 1 April to 30 June 2009 176 50% 8% 20%
4 Abatement and Infringement Notices
Thirty abatement and six infringement notices were issued during this reporting period. The sum of the infringement notices issued for this period was $3,350. Below is a brief summary of details relating to the notices issued:
s.9 RMA s.13 RMA s.14 RMA s.15 RMA Land Use Beds of Water Discharges Lakes and Rivers
Abatements 4* 4* 14 12* Issued
Infringements 1 2 nil 3 Issued
*Note: Two abatements were issued covering sections 9, 13 and 15 RMA issues
4.1 Abatement Notices
• 2010/A011 WL Davis (Okawa Bay Road, Rotorua): Required to remove an unauthorised retaining wall constructed in the lakebed of Lake Rotoiti. • 2010/A016 Body Corporate Number 350937 (Pillans Road, Tauranga): Required to supply records of geothermal water taken and undertake sampling, as required by consent 62728. • 2010/A017 Tauranga Motor Hotel Limited (Willow Street, Tauranga): Required to supply records relating to geothermal water taken, as required by consent 63497. • 2010/A018 PD Dawson (Westridge Drive, Tauranga): Required to supply records and results relating to geothermal water taken, as required by consent 65131. • 2010/A019 RA Swindail (Kotuku Place, Matua): Required to supply records and results relating to geothermal water taken, as required by consent 63517. • 2010/A020 DT Murray Limited (Triton Avenue, Mount Maunganui): Required to remove contaminated material, and cease discharging further material onto land, from an industrial or trade premise (automotive dismantlers). • 2010/A021 Katikati Transport Limited (State Highway 2, Katikati): Required to undertake stream monitoring and undertake maintenance works on their effluent pond and disposal system, as required by consent 62871.
44
A509201 Schedule of Complaints and Enforcement Activities: 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010
• 2010/A022 JB Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to prevent the unauthorised discharge of sewage to land, and to upgrade the septic tank system as required by consent 60602. • 2010/A023 RD Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to prevent the unauthorised discharge of sewage to land, and to upgrade the septic tank system as required by consent 60602. • 2010/A024 KS Addison, The Estate of Frank Moody Addison (Welcome Bay Road, Tauranga): Required to cease depositing waste material to a landfill and to properly cap the landfill, as required by expired consent 60064. • 2010/A025 VA Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to prevent the unauthorised discharge of sewage to land, and to upgrade the septic tank system as required by consent 60602. • 2010/A026 DC Hooper, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to prevent the unauthorised discharge of sewage to land, and to upgrade the septic tank system as required by consent 60602. • 2010/A027 JB Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to take water measurement records and forward the records to Council as required by consent 60601. • 2010/A028 RD Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to take water measurement records and forward the records to Council as required by consent 60601. • 2010/A029 VA Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to take water measurement records and forward the records to Council as required by consent 60601. • 2010/A030 DC Hooper, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to take water measurement records and forward the records to Council as required by consent 60601. • 2010/A031 JB Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to cease the discharge of geothermal fluid into a stream by reinjecting the fluid into a reinjection bore, and to ensure the production and reinjection bores and associated pipeworks are maintained and operated appropriately. All actions are as required by consents 60454 and 60455. • 2010/A032 RD Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to cease the discharge of geothermal fluid into a stream by reinjecting the fluid into a reinjection bore, and to ensure the production and reinjection bores and associated pipeworks are maintained and operated appropriately. All actions are as required by consents 60454 and 60455. • 2010/A033 VA Massam, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to cease the discharge of geothermal fluid into a stream by reinjecting the fluid into a reinjection bore, and to ensure the production and reinjection bores and associated pipeworks are maintained and operated appropriately. All actions are as required by consents 60454 and 60455. • 2010/A034 DC Hooper, as Trustee of the Vision Charitable Trust (Lakes Ranch, Lake Rotokawau Road, Rotorua): Required to cease the discharge of
45
A509201 Schedule of Complaints and Enforcement Activities: 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010
geothermal fluid into a stream by reinjecting the fluid into a reinjection bore, and to ensure the production and reinjection bores and associated pipeworks are maintained and operated appropriately. All actions are as required by consents 60454 and 60455. • 2010/A035 Prime BOP Limited (Bidois Street, Rotorua): Required to take all actions necessary to prevent the discharge of timber treatment chemicals to land or to water. • 2010/A036 Prime BOP Limited (Bidois Street, Rotorua): Required to undertake an investigation into the extent of timber treatment chemical contamination of a watercourse, and to undertake remedial works to remove any remaining contaminants identified by the investigation. • 2010/A037 BM Somerville (Casuarina Drive, Te Puke): Required to remove woody debris and sediment from a tributary of the Mangorewa River, and to stabilise the site. • 2010/A038 MF Dodd (Casuarina Drive, Te Puke): Required to remove woody debris and sediment from a tributary of the Mangorewa River, and to stabilise the site. • 2010/A039 KS Addison, The Estate of Frank Moody Addison (Welcome Bay Road, Tauranga): Required to undertake leachate monitoring and forward results, as required by consent 60093. • 2010/A040 Ohiwa Cove Limited (Reeves and Ohiwa Harbour Roads, Ohiwa): Required to stabilise all exposed areas on the sites, and to install and maintain appropriate sediment and erosion controls, as required by consent 65955. • 2010/A041 KS Addison (Welcome Bay Road, Tauranga): Required to cease importing waste material on to the site, and to cease disturbing existing stockpiles of waste material on the site. • 2010/A042 BJM Martin (Wright Road, Katikati): Requiring that a culvert be re- installed so as to comply with the requirements of the Regional Water and Land Plan. • 2010/A043 MR Gleeson (Wylie Street, Rotorua): Requiring that the taking of geothermal heat cease and that the associated pipeworks and pumps be disconnected. • 2010/A044 NY Yoo (Lake Road, Rotorua): Required to monitor and supply records of flow and temperature for a geothermal take, as required by consent 64297.
4.2 Infringement Notices
• 2010/I027 Bakels Edible Oils (NZ) Ltd (Hutton Place, Mt Maunganui): For the unauthorised discharge of material, namely oil and grease contaminated effluent, onto land. Fine of $1000. • 2010/I028 HC Evans (Taranui Place, Ohauiti): For failing to notify the occupiers of an adjoining property that an agrichemical was being sprayed, in breach of the Regional Air Plan. Fine of $300. • 2010/I029 WL Davis (Okawa Bay Road, Lake Rotoiti): For instructing a contractor to construct a retaining wall in the bed of Lake Rotoiti without consent. Fine of $500. • 2010/I030 RS Rogers (Okawa Bay Road, Lake Rotoiti): For constructing a retaining wall in the bed of Lake Rotoiti without consent. Fine of $500.
46
A509201 Schedule of Complaints and Enforcement Activities: 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010
• 2010/I031 KS Addison (Welcome Bay Road, Tauranga): For failing to cease depositing waste onto land by 31 December 2009 as required by consent 60064. Fine of $300. • 2010/I032 KS Addison (Welcome Bay Road, Tauranga): For the repeated failing to submit leachate test results as required by consent 60093. Fine of $750.
5 Prosecutions
On the 1st and 2 nd of July 2010, two dairy effluent related cases were heard at the District Court in Hamilton. In both cases guilty pleas were entered.
Both farms drained into the Waitet ī Stream catchment, with the stream having significance as a habitat and for fisheries values. The stream is also a recognised bathing site.
Both of these farms came under the spotlight as a result of investigating possible sources of effluent entering the Waitet ī Stream catchment. Staff had received complaints alleging that the stream ran very discoloured from time to time. As a result, an inspection of a number of farms in the catchment was undertaken in August 2009. Note that this was separate to the compliance audit of every farm in the Lake Rotorua catchment which was carried out on 1 September 2009.
A brief summary of each case follows.
Several other cases will be heard at the Tauranga District Court in early September. The results of those sentencing’s will be detailed in the next report covering the period July through to September 2010.
5.1 Fantastic Farms Ltd
On 1 July 2010, the hearing was held after Fantastic Farms Ltd pleaded guilty to four charges relating to the unauthorised discharge of dairy effluent and for breaching of an abatement notice.
In August 2009 an inspection found that the effluent system was not being operated satisfactorily. A follow-up inspection in September revealed further problems with effluent overflowing a feed pad pond, from where it entered a tributary of the Waitet ī Stream. An abatement notice was issued in early September.
In a further follow-up inspection on 6 October, staff observed evidence of further overflows from the feedpad pond. In addition there was effluent ponding around an irrigator, with runoff from that ponding entering a watercourse.
Judge Thompson commented on the cumulative effects of these types of discharges and the need for them to be prevented from occurring. He noted that since the offence the company has spent approximately $60,000 on the construction of a new lined effluent storage pond, which if managed correctly should address the issues observed during the offending.
Of importance to note is that this case was the first one Council has taken under the new RMA amendments. They state that for any offences committed after 1 October 2009 the maximum fine has risen from $200,000 (pre amendment), up to $300,000 for individuals and $600,000 for companies.
At sentencing the Judge awarded $10,000 for each charge of the four charges, that is $40,000 in total. Staff believe that the penalty was appropriate given the circumstances outlined above.
47
A509201 Schedule of Complaints and Enforcement Activities: 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010
It appears to be a slight elevation on pre-RMA changes described above, which is appropriate, as by raising the maximum fine levels, the government is clearly indicating a need to raise the levels of penalty being awarded by the Courts. $40,000 is less than 2% of the maximum penalty that the four charges could have been subjected to i.e. $600,000 each charge.
5.2 Wildhaber Wench and Co Ltd, and L Wildhaber
This case related to the direct discharge of dairy effluent into the Waitet ī Stream from an overflowing sump. The discharge had a faecal coliform level of 1.6 million per 100mL.
Several other issues were noted on the farm, however the charges related to the discharge from the sump. The defendants pleaded guilty to two charges (one for the company and one as an individual).
Judge Thompson awarded a fine of $8400 per charge i.e. $16,800 total.
6 Financial Implications
Current Budget
Covered by existing budget in the Pollution Prevention Programme in the Resource Regulation Activity.
Future Implications
As above.
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
No changes or implications to the Ten Year Plan or Annual Plan.
Steve Pickles Pollution Prevention Team Leader
for Group Manager Water Management
15 July 2010
48
A509201
File Reference: 4.00202 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Bruce Gardner, Pollution Prevention Manager
Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
Executive Summary
Large scale earthwork sites have decreased from 98 to 68 sites from the previous reporting period with the High, Moderate and Poor ratings very similar. There has been 1 Prosecution that was reported on in the last monitoring report with the charges being laid in this reporting period, and 1 infringement notice and 3 abatement notices issued.
The Pollution Prevention team are continually identifying and addressing all non-compliant issues quickly and it is pleasing to see there has been continued improvement and co-operation with consultancy firms and contractors to undertake correct procedures relating to environmental issues contained within the consent conditions.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season.
2 Background
This report covers resource consent compliance of 68 large scale earthworks sites within the Bay of Plenty region that held resource consents during the period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 and where earthworks were undertaken during the reporting period.
Most large scale earthworks fall into the categories of land development for residential subdivision, recontouring of land for horticultural use and road works. This report does not cover earthworks associated with forestry work or quarries, as this is covered by separate compliance reports.
3 Method of compliance monitoring
Monitoring of earthworks generally consists of the following:
49
A509201 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
• A pre-construction meeting. This is where Bay of Plenty Regional Council staff meet the key contacts at the earthworks site, such as consultants, contractors and consent holders;
• Routine compliance inspections. These are where staff undertake programmed inspections of the site, generally making contact with the consent holder, or representative, prior to any visit; and
• Complaint response. These inspections are the result of Bay of Plenty Regional Council receiving complaints, generally through our Pollution Hotline system, alleging that some type of consent breach or adverse effect is occurring on the earthworks sites. Most earthwork complaints relate to dust nuisance or off site sediment discharges into waterways.
After a compliance inspection has been carried out, staff will issue the consent holder with a fieldsheet, and on most occasions the contractor and consultant are also issued with a copy. These summarise any issues or concerns that may have been noted during the inspection. The fieldsheet also clearly details any actions required to bring the site into compliance if required. At that time staff will allocate a compliance rating based on what was observed at the site visit.
This compliance report relies on the comments and issues raised by staff during the reporting period. From these comments a summary table has been created for each site. These tables are compiled as Appendix 1, 2 and 3. The consent holder that received a poor rating has been sent a copy of the summary for their site, inviting them to make comment. No comments were received prior to finalising this report.
4 Compliance results
Each site has been given an overall compliance rating (see Appendix 1, 2 and 3) which takes into account the sites performance over the whole reporting period. Sites are rated as follows:
• High : indicates compliance with all or most consent conditions with non- compliance being of a low risk to the environment.
• Moderate : indicates compliance with most conditions and the environmental consequence of non-compliance is deemed to be minor, but has the potential to result in moderate environmental effects.
• Poor : indicates a failure to comply with a number of consent conditions and/or the consequence of non-compliance is deemed to be significant.
Table 1 shows a summary of the compliance ratings for the 2009/2010 season, and compares with the previous four earthworks seasons:
Table 1: Summary of Compliance Ratings
Period Total High Moderate Poor Number of Sites in Sites Tauranga area of Region
2009/10 68 82% 15% 3% 45
50
A509201 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
2008/09 98 84% 14% 2% 76
2007/08 92 85% 15% 0% 69
2006/07 149 82% 17% 1% 104
2005/06 139 70% 28% 2% 99
2004/05 123 69% 26% 5% 65
Table 1 indicates that there has been a marked decrease in large scale earthwork sites compared with the 2008/2009 period. There has been a decrease from 98 to 68 sites. This equates to approximately a 31% decrease in large scale earthwork sites in the Bay of Plenty region for the 2009/2010 period.
The data also reveals that the level of compliance has remained fairly consistent over the previous 4 years, with only a small decrease in the level of “High” ratings last season.
5 Enforcement results
During this reporting period there has been 1 Prosecution that was reported on in the last monitoring report with the charges being laid in this reporting period.
There has been 1 infringement notice and 3 abatement notices issued.
The main issues of non-compliance during the 2009/2010 season were:
• Erosion and sediment controls not appropriately maintained;
• Poorly treated storm water leaving the site;
• Erosion and sediment controls not installed correctly, as per guidelines and/or consent conditions;
• Miscellaneous breaches, i.e. failure to erect signage, decommissioning sediment controls without appropriate notification.
• Site not stabilised within the time frames stipulated in the consents
• Bulk earthworks undertaken within the exclusion period; and
The largest amount of non-compliance where some type of intervention was required by Pollution Prevention staff was erosion and sediment controls not appropriately maintained and poorly treated stormwater leaving the site. This is unfortunate as some of the main problems in the last reporting period were identical to these.
This year, Pollution Prevention staff members have once again been active in ensuring the sites were compliant in relation to the permitted and controlled discharge of stormwater and this is evident with the amount of non-compliance located. It is unfortunate that the lack of sediment controls, maintenance and high sediment discharge is still occurring and it is hoped that with continued and dedicated compliance inspections that the message will get through to consent holders, contractors and consultants alike.
51
A509201 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
A summary of the Infringement and Abatement notices issued, and a comparison with enforcement undertaken during the 2005/2006, 2006/2007, 2007/2008, 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 seasons, is presented in Table 2 and 3:
Table 2: Summary of Infringement Notices issued
Infringements Dust Sediment E&S E&S Site not Bulk Misc discharge controls controls stabilised e/w’s offsite not not past cut- installed maintained off date 2009/2010 1 2008/2009 2 2 1 2 2007/2008 1 1 2006/2007 2 1 1 2 1 5 2005/2005 1 2 4 3 1 5
Table 3: Summary of Abatement Notices issued
Abatements Dust Sediment E&S E&S Site not Bulk Misc discharge controls controls stabilised e/w’s offsite not not past cut- installed maintained off date 2009/2010 2 1 2008/2009 2 1 2007/2008 1 2 1 2006/2007 1 4 3 1 1 2005/2006 3 4 1 12 2 1
6 Summary
It is still satisfying to see the high level of compliance for large scale earthwork sites in the Bay of Plenty. The sites have been monitored consistently by staff and although “Poor” rated sites have increased marginally. It is believed that the continued high standard in compliance results can be attributed to:
• The industry which includes consultancy firms and contractors have actively attended training programmes, are completing self auditing processes and increasing their general knowledge relating to effects on these sites and the receiving environment.
• The ever increasing cooperation of consultancy firms and contractors to proactively work towards ensuring compliance.
• The continued decrease in tolerance by Bay of Plenty Regional Council staff to non-compliance issues at all earthwork sites.
• The continued mentoring by senior staff members, team leaders and managers in this team, advising staff in the pollution prevention team of correct earthwork site management, investigative methods and correct protocol.
52
A509201 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
7 Conclusion
The 2009/2010 season can be summarised as follows:
• The amount of large scale earthwork sites has decreased from 98 sites in 2008/2009 to 68 sites in the 2009/2010 period, a 31% decrease.
• The High rating for sites decreased marginally from 84% to 82%.
• The Moderate rating for sites increased marginally from 14% to 15%.
• The Poor rating for sites increased from 2% to 3%.
• The amount of large scale earthwork sites in the Tauranga area continues to be the majority for the region with 45 out of 68 sites.
• There was 1 Prosecution initiated, 1 infringement notice and 3 abatement notices issued during this period.
• The continued objective by the Pollution Prevention team to identify and address all non-compliant issues quickly.
• Continuing support from consultancy firms and contractors to adopt correct procedures relating to environmental issues contained within the consent
conditions.
8 Financial Implications
Current Budget
Covered by existing budget in the Pollution Prevention Programme in the Resource Regulation Activity.
Future Implications
As above.
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
No charges or implications to the Ten Year Plan or Annual Plan
Appendix 1: High Rated Compliance Sites
Consent Consent Holder Location of Site Rating 60966 Durham Property Invetsments 1194 Ōmokoroa Road, Tauranga High Limited 62187 Apata Limited Turntable Road, Apata High 62298 Thorne Family Trust Soloman Street, Tauranga High 62762 Charles Calvin Maunder Oliver Road, Te Puna, Tauranga High 62768 Saint Michaels Limited Carmichael Road, Tauranga High
53
A509201 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
62951 Bax Contractors Limited Te Puna Station Road, Tauranga High 63250 IMF Backstop Limited SH 29, Tauriko, Tauranga High 63291 Frasers Papamoa Limited 30 Papamoa Beach Road, High Papamoa 63526 Ambrose Trust – The trustees 8 Poplar Lane, Te Puke High 63578 Page Transport Limited Rangiuru Road, Welcome Bay, High Tauranga 63616 Whakatane District Council Ohinekoao Stream, Herepuru High Road, Matata 63885 Hugh Green Contractors Limited 166 Waikete Road, Welcome High Bay, Tauranga 64184 17th Avenue Consolidated 150 17 th Avenue, Tauranga High Limited 64304 Ōmokoroa General Carriers 42 Francis Road, Omokoroa High (1994) Limited 64315 Comanche Holdings Limited SH 29, Tauriko, Tauranga High 64400 Tauranga City Council Beaumaris Boulevard & Sterling High Gate Drive, Bethlehem 64474 Whakatane District Council Western Matata Lagoon, SH 2, High Matata 64503 Whakatane District Council Road Reserve, Ohopr Road, High Ohope 64785 Rotorua District Council Rotorua Regional Airport, Te High Ngae Road, SH 30, Rotorua 64872 Eleven Maunganui Road 7 – 13 Maunganui Road, Mount High Maunganui 64975 Station Road Limited 33 Station Road, Te Puke High 64989 Retirement Assets Limited Maranui Street, Papamoa High 65012 Durham Property Investments 1194 Omokoroa Road, Omokoroa High Limited 65021 Tauranga City Council State Highway 2, Bethlehem High 65042 Tauranga Airport Authority 101 Aerodrome Road, Tauranga High Airport, Mt Maunganui 65043 Asia Pacific Management Limited 6, 8 & 10 Maunganui Road, High Mount Muanganui 65049 Double R Waih ī Limited 123 – 125 Emerton Road, High Athenree, Waih ī Beach 65095 Western Bay of Plenty District Kaitemako Road, Tauranga High Council 65102 Clarkson RM 101 Aerodrome Road, Mount High Maunganui 65115 K – Pax Limited 65 Westminster Drive, Tauranga High 65122 Whakatane District Council Waitepuru Stream channel, High Matata 65140 Tauranga City Council Anchorage Grove Reserve, High Maungatapu Road, Tauranga 65159 Comanche Holdings Limited SH 29, Tauriko, Tauranga High 65164 Minister for Social Development Adjacent to SH 30, Rotorua High & Employment 65216 Aerocool Limited Mends Lane, Paengaroa High 65223 Rowesdale Trust Rowesdale Drive, Ohauiti, High Tauranga 65237 Dohnt Investments Trust 64 Conway Road, Paengaroa High 65241 Classic Builders Limited 130 Darraghs Road, Tauranga High 65304 WBOPDC and Tauranga City SH 36, West of Pyes Pa Road, High Council Tauranga
54
A509201 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
65332 Walton BE and R Seaford Park, Emerton Road, High Waih ī Beach 65435 New Zealand Transport Agency State Highway 2, Te Maunga to High Te Puke 65519 Tauranga City Council Parton Road, Papamoa High 65551 Hurlstone Earthmoving Limited Adjacent to SH 30, Rotorua High 65614 Whakatane District Council an Rangitaiki, Edgecumbe High BOPRC 65742 Tauranga City Council Adjacent to Historic Village, High Seventeenth Ave, Tauranga 65755 New Zealand Transport Agency SH 5, Fairy Springs Rd, Rotorua High 65757 Western Bay of Plenty District 75 Ōmokoroa Road, Omokoroa High Council 65785 Western Bay of Plenty District Rowe Road, Ohauiti, Tauranga High Council 65797 Rotorua District Council Lake Okareka and Tarawera Rd, High Rotorua 65842 Site Solutions (BOP) Limited 135 Manuwai Drive, Matua, High Tauranga 65888 Whakatane District Council Muriwai Drive, Whakatane High 65904 Opotiki District Council Ohiwa loop Road, Ohiwa Harbour High 66037 Bragg L.E. 177 Johnson Road, Pongakawa High 66141 TBM Holdings Limited 229 Rototaha Road, Te Mahoe High 66142 Gordon N & N 338 Ohiwa Harbour, Opotoki High 66144 Ngati Tuwharetoa Geothermal Onepu Springs Road, Onepu High Assets Limited
Appendix 2: Moderate Rated Compliance Sites
Consent Consent Location of Rating Infringement Abatement Compliance Holder Site Notice Notice Issues (see Issued Issued key) 61858 Daniel Trust Te Puna Moderate No No 7 BC and BM Station Rd, Tauranga 63195 Waterbridge Maungatapu Moderate No No 4
55
A509201 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
Limited Road, Maungatapu 64063 Scapen Sanctuary Moderate No Yes 4 Holdings Point, Limited Tauranga 64552 Apata Wainui Moderate No No 6 Holdings South Rd, Wainui 64825 Bellerby J & 33 Bryans Moderate No No 2, 3 M Beach Road, Ohiwa 65116 Whakatane Ohope Hill Moderate No No 4, 5 District Road, Council Ohope 65146 Transit New SH 36, Moderate No No 3 Zealand Rotorua 65865 Bay The Hub, 39 Moderate No No 2, 3 Bulldozing Mill Rd, Limited Whakatane 65913 Lakes Rotorua Moderate No No 7 District Hospital, 5 Health Pukeroa St, Board Rotorua 65955 Ohiwa Cove Reeves Rd Moderate No Yes 2, 3, 5 Limited & Ohiwa Rd, Ohiwa
Key:
1. Dust leaving the boundary of the site 2. Poorly treated stormwater leaving the site 3. Erosion and sediment controls not installed correctly, as per Guidelines and/or consent conditions 4. Erosion and sediment controls not appropriately maintained 5. Site not stabilised within the timeframes stipulated in the consents 6. Bulk earthworks undertaken within exclusion period 7. Miscellaneous breaches i.e. failure to erect signage, decommissioning sediment controls without appropriate notification
Appendix 3: Poor Rated Compliance Sites
Consent Holder: The Estate of Frank Moody Addison Consent Number :60064 Consent Expiry Date: 31 January 2010 Purpose: To discharge green waste, construction waste and cleanfill into and onto land on the consent holders property at 940 Welcome Bay Road, Welcome Bay, Tauranga. Location : 940 Welcome Bay Road, Welcome Bay, Tauranga. Notices Issued: Yes Infringement: Yes x 1 Abatement: Yes x 1 Compliance Level: Poor Details of Non-Compliance: This site is classified as poor as the consent holders
56
A509201 Earthworks Compliance Monitoring Report: 2009/2010 season
representative has continued to accept waste material after the expiry of the consent and has not taken any measures to cap the landfill. This has been for financial gain. At present Regional Council staff are following up the closing of the site and setting up appropriate and consistent water testing regimes.
Consent Holder: Utopia Developments Limited Consent Number :65139 Consent Expiry Date: 30 December 2028 Purpose: To authorise and set conditions on earthworks and wetland disturbance and construction of two bunds associated with the development of Utopia Park subdivision, the discharge of sediment contaminated stormwater from the earthworks site during the construction and permanent stomwater discharge from the subdivision. Location : Corner of Waikite Rd and Welcome Bay Rd, Tauranga Notices Issued: No Infringement: No Abatement: No Compliance Level: Poor Details of Non-Compliance: Ongoing discharge associated with unstable fill batter slope. Recent slope instability during rainfall events in May 2010. The developer has walked away from the site failing to install and maintain sediment controls, maintenance or stabilisation. Further enforcement action is being prepared for consideration.
Mike Caldwell Pollution Prevention Officer
for Pollution Prevention Manager
26 August 2010
57
A509201 A509201
File Reference: 4.00209 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Bruce Gardner, Pollution Prevention Manager
Report on Wastewater Treatment Plants in the region
Executive Summary
This report summarises the performance of 12 municipal wastewater treatment plants in the Western Bay of Plenty, Kawerau, Whakat āne and Ōpōtiki districts, from July 2007 to June 2010. Overall performance is good, although there are some ongoing issues with the receiving of compliance results, some exceedances for microbial counts, and the maintenance and operation of some sites. No enforcement action was taken during the reporting period.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Report on Wastewater Treatment Plants in the region.
2 Background
Inspections are conducted on Wastewater Treatment Plants by the Pollution Prevention Officers on a regular basis. Large treatment plants are inspected every six months while smaller rural plants are visited annually.
The inspection comprises a visual check of the plant to determine compliance with the consent, and collection of samples where necessary. Sites with on-going issues may require a revisit. In addition, compliance returns are reviewed upon receipt.
The consent holders, or their designated contractors, are responsible for sample collection, plant maintenance and consent compliance.
Compliance for the Rotorua and Tauranga (Te Maunga and Chapel St) wastewater treatment plants are detailed in separate reports.
Sites are rated as follows:
High : indicates compliance with all or most consent conditions with non-compliance being of a low risk to the environment.
59
A509201 Report on Wastewater Treatment Plants in the region
Moderate : indicates compliance with most conditions and the environmental consequence of non-compliance is deemed to be minor, but has the potential to result in moderate environmental effects.
Poor : indicates a failure to comply with a number of consent conditions and/or the consequence of non-compliance is deemed to be significant.
3 Results
Compliance results are shown in tabulated form by region. Results are shown for each plant and list the compliance rating, any compliance issues and any associated consents.
3.1 Ōpōtiki District Council
Consent Number: 63179 Location: Snells Beach, Opotiki
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to land Compliance Rating : High Areas for Improvement: No issues, site is well maintained with no overflow or odour. A separate permitted activity for the settling and screening of septic tank waste is currently operating, under the authorisation of the consent owner.
3.2 Kawerau District Council
Consent Number: 65081 Location: Kawerau Wastewater Treatment Plant, Spencer Ave, Kawerau
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to land, and contaminants to air Compliance Rating : High Areas for Improvement: No objectionable odours and no breach of discharge limits
3.3 Western Bay of Plenty District Council
Consent Number: 24889 Location : Te Puke Sewage Plant, Gordon St, Te Puke
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to ground (wetland) Compliance Rating : High Areas for Improvement: Area is well maintained; no damage to stream banks or erosion. Reporting is up to date. Associated Consents: 24891 (see below), 30135 – Discharge to air – no issues, compliance rating High
Consent Number: 24891 Location: Te Puke Sewage Plant, Waiari Stream, Te Puke
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to water Compliance Rating : Moderate Areas for Improvement: Exceedances for Faecal Coliforms for April 2009, and February-April 2010, due to plant problems. These problems have been addressed. Associated Consents: 24889 (see above), 30135 – Discharge to air – no issues, compliance rating High
60
A509201 Report on Wastewater Treatment Plants in the region
Consent Number: 24895 Location: Katikati Treatment Plant
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to water Compliance Rating : Moderate Areas for Improvement: Intermittent exceedances in 2009 for Faecal coliforms, Enterococci and suspended solids. Some problems with flow datalogger in 2008. Emergency pond and 2 dewatering ponds constructed in 2009. Results up-to-date. Vegetation in the wetland area is sparse in some areas. Associated Consents: 30136 – Discharge to air - all records up to date, no major odours detected. Compliance rating High.
Consent Number: 24939 Location: Waihi Beach Sewage Treatment Plant
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to land via highrate irrigation Compliance Rating : Moderate Areas for Improvement: Exceedances for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus during the wetland desludging program in 2009. Associated Consents: 24940 (see below), 30137 – Discharge to air – no concerns, Compliance rating High.
Consent Number: 24940 Location: Waihi Beach Sewage Treatment Plant
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to land via seepage Compliance Rating : High Areas for Improvement: Site is operating well, no issues Associated Consents: 24939 and 30137 (see above)
3.4 Whakat āne District Council
Consent Number: 20049 Location: Tāneatua Oxidation Ponds
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to water Compliance Rating : Moderate Areas for Improvement : Maintenance required to prevent seepage from the ponds discharging on to adjacent farmland. Associated Consents: 62658 – Discharge to air. No odour concerns but still waiting for a contingency report which was due in 2005. Compliance rating High.
Consent Number: 20368 Location: Whakat āne Oxidation Ponds
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to water Compliance Rating : High Areas for Improvement: Complaint received in May 2010 regarding the discharge of effluent into the Kopeopeo Canal during heavy rainfall; this was rectified. Some ongoing maintenance concerns. Associated Consents: 62659 Discharge to air – Compliance rating High, no ongoing concerns.
Consent Number: 20702 Location: Edgecumbe Oxidation Ponds
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to water Compliance Rating : Moderate Areas for Improvement: Maintenance was required on the outlet structures to prevent solids discharging to the canal, and also work was needed on wavebands. In addition, heavy rain and stormwater inflows in June 2010 caused the pipe carrying untreated effluent from the pump
61
A509201 Report on Wastewater Treatment Plants in the region
station to the ponds to burst, discharging contaminants into a neighbouring farm and a nearby drain. An emergency operation was undertaken to repair the line and effluent at the pump station was trucked to the pond. Associated Consents: 62657 – Discharge to air. No ongoing odour concerns but a contingency report was due in 2005 and has not been received. Compliance rating High.
Consent Number: 20778 Location: Murupara Oxidation Ponds
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to water Compliance Rating : High Areas for Improvement: Operation and maintenance of the treatment system has not been consistently satisfactory. Consent changed in 2008 to increase discharge from 1000m 3/d to 1350m 3/d. Associated Consents: 62656 - Discharge to air. No ongoing concerns for odour but a contingency report due in 2005 has not yet been received. Compliance rating High.
Consent Number: 60568 Location: Ōhope Oxidation Ponds
Purpose: Discharge treated effluent to water Compliance Rating : Moderate Areas for Improvement: Some delays in receiving compliance results. Exceedances for Enterococci, Faecal coliform and E. coli counts on one occasion in 2009. Overflows into drain and harbour occurred during June 2010 rain event. Consent expired 31 July 2010; replacement consent being processed. Associated Consents: 60569 - Discharge to air – some odour in 2009, but overall compliance rating High
4 Conclusion
Overall, compliance was achieved for the sites but there are some ongoing maintenance issues such as weed growth, build-up of plastics, and waveband erosion that should not occur under best practice operating procedures. There were intermittent exceedances for microbiological consent conditions, mostly due to operational changes.
There have been two incidents of overflowing ponds at both the Ohope and Whakatane sites, and a burst pipe at Edgecumbe. These issues have all been addressed with the consent holder. They all related to events during the extremely heavy rainfall experienced this year. Staff are following up the seepage issue identified at the Taneatua pond.
In addition staff are still awaiting management plans relating to odour management for several of the WDC operated wastewater treatment plants.
5 Financial Implications
Current Budget
Covered by the existing budget in the Pollution Prevention Programme in the Resource Regulation Activity.
Future Implications
As above.
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
62
A509201 Report on Wastewater Treatment Plants in the region
No changes or implications to the Ten Year Plan or Annual Plan.
Steve Pickles Pollution Prevention Team Leader
for Pollution Prevention Manager
2 August 2010
63
A509201 A509201
File Reference: 7.00007 1.00804 Significance of Decision: Low
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Eddie Grogan, Group Manager Water Management
Appointment and Powers of Navigation and Safety Enforcement Officers and Honorary Enforcement Officers.
Executive Summary
The Bay of Plenty Regional Council has reviewed the Navigation Safety Bylaws as a requirement of the Local Government Act 2002. Staff have now also reviewed the appointments and powers of navigation and safety enforcement officers and honorary enforcement officers. Appointment of these officers is made by Council under section 650B of the Local Government Act 1974. This report asks the Committee to recommend to Council that it appoints, and provides powers to, enforcement officers and honorary enforcement officers.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Appointment and Powers of Navigation and Safety Enforcement Officers and Honorary Enforcement Officers..
2 Confirms that the significance of the decision has been assessed as LOW, and under Section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) confirms that in light of the level of significance of the decision it does not require: (a) Further identification and assessment of different options under section 77 LGA; (b) Further investigation or consideration of community views under section 78 LGA; (c) Any further written record of the manner in which section 77 and section 78 matters have been addressed.
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee recommend that the Regional Council:
1 Appoints under section 650B of the Local Government Act 1974 the persons listed in Appendix 1 of this report as enforcement officers and honorary enforcement officers with the specified powers.
2 Provides the Harbour Master, Deputy Harbour Master and enforcement officers with warrants pursuant to section 174 of the Local Government Act 1974.
1
A509201 Appointment and Powers of Navigation and Safety Enforcement Officers and Honorary Enforcement Officers.
2 Purpose
To seek a resolution from Council to appoint enforcement officers and honorary enforcement officers to carry out duties under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1974 (Part 39A) and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council Navigation Safety Bylaw 2010.
3 Background
Under section 650B of the Local Government Act 1974 a Regional Council may appoint Harbour Masters and Enforcement Officers (including Honorary Enforcement Officers) for the purposes ensuring navigation safety in the waters of its region. The relevant powers are those specified in Part 39A and Part 43 of the Act and these include enforcing navigation and safety bylaws.
Harbourmasters or enforcement officers do not need any specific authorisations under the LGA 1974, as their powers under that Act flow as a direct consequence of their appointment under section 650B (1) LGA 1974. Those powers are set out under Part 39A of the LGA 1974 and also under Part 43, i.e. section 699C (Infringement notices).
Honorary Enforcement Officers have only such powers as the Council specifies in the instrument appointing them. Powers must then be noted in the instrument appointing the Honorary Enforcement Officer.
4 Staff Appointments
Council staff are appointed through their employment to positions. This covers the position of Harbour Master, Deputy Harbour Master and enforcement officers. As they are staff the Chief Executive therefore has the authority to specify the powers that apply individuals holding these positions. For completeness, the Council should have a separate document for each individual appointment.
5 Non-staff Appointments
For non-staff appointments, powers need to be provided by Council through the appointment process. The Chief Executive is not delegated to make these appointments or to specify powers.
5.1 Enforcement Officers
Generally enforcement officers are Council staff. However non-Council staff may be appointed to this role if they have a relevant role in the community (for example, police officers) or are contractors to Council who carry out maritime works for Council and have the knowledge and experience that makes them suitable additions to the enforcement resource.
5.2 Honorary Enforcement Officers
The Act also authorises Council to appoint honorary enforcement officers.
Honorary enforcement officers provide their time voluntarily to assist in promoting safety on the water. Their role involves observing navigation safety and reporting on it during their own boating or recreational activities. Honorary enforcement officers receive training and support. Staff members may volunteer for this role if they have a personal interest in doing so.
2
A509201 Appointment and Powers of Navigation and Safety Enforcement Officers and Honorary Enforcement Officers.
It is Council’s expectation that honorary enforcement officers advise, educate and occasionally assist with the boating public but do not enforce bylaws.
The following powers are therefore recommended:
Pursuant to section 650(1) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1974 Honorary enforcement officers can require persons appearing to be in charge of a vessel or any person found committing an offence against the Council’s navigation bylaws to give their name and address, provided that there are reasonable grounds for believing that a person has committed a breach of maritime rules involving navigation safety; Although there is no statutory basis for doing so, for education or evidential purposes honorary enforcement officers are generally authorised to issue warning notices for a range of behaviours that have the potential to be offences as outlined in the Navigation Safety Bylaw 2010, including: • Excessive wake • Not using life jackets • Under age operator of a vessel • No observer while waterskiing • Bow riding.
6 Warranting
There is only limited scope for the Council to issue warrants to enforcement officers appointed under section 650B (1) of the Local Government Act 1974.
Under section 174 of the Local Government Act 2002 a local authority can issue a warrant in writing to enforcement officers, but only to authorise the Harbour Master, Deputy Harbour Master or enforcement officers to enter private land in accordance with provisions of the Local Government Act 1974.
The area of navigation safety has been retained within the 1974 Local Government Act rather than transferring the relevant provisions across to the 2002 Act. Unfortunately this has created some areas of ambiguity between it and the 2002 Act. Specifically, the 1974 Act requires a warrant to be shown under section 650F but the specific warranting provision (section 710) has been repealed. It is possible that the intention was that section 174 of the 2002 Act would replace the power under section 710. However, the position is not entirely clear.
Warranting officers is a matter for Council - rather than the Chief Executive. To avoid doubt, it is recommended that new warrants under section 174 of the Local Government Act 2002 are provided to all Maritime staff.
7 Financial Implications
Current Budget
There are no current budget implications.
Future Implications
There are no future budget implications
3
A509201 Appointment and Powers of Navigation and Safety Enforcement Officers and Honorary Enforcement Officers.
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
There are no Ten Year Plan/ Annual Plan implications.
Toni Briggs Planner
for Group Manager Water Management
30 August 2010
$Appendix1Appoi ntment.1970.0831083556$
4
A509201
Appendix
A509201
A509201 Attachment 1: Appointments and Authorisations – Volunteers and Contractors
Role Powers Sub-Region Name
Eastern Bay Brian Gibbons Enforcement General powers section 650C Officers of LGA 1974 Regulate some navigation Chris Isherwood (Contractor) Western Bay activities section 650E(3) of Craig Madden (Police) LGA 1974 Issuing infringement notices Rotorua -
Bob Batt Dave Gee Ted Gee Eastern Bay Don Herdman Ian Snowsill Corb Whitton Mopere Taniwha
Ken Bedford Donna Bennett Barry Benton Grahan Bilyard John Breitler Frank Bullen Pat Bullen Tim Chadwick Don Colebourne Dave Grant Noel Haszard Peter Head Ross Hislop Daryl Hone David Horne Inspection of navigation safety Western Bay Graeme Hull licences Fred Jeans Honorary Wayne Johnson Obtaining names and contact Enforcement Mark Mayston details Office Isabella Obermiller Issue warning notices for Mike Palmer potential offences Dave Parker Leigh Pettigrew Kurt Ribeiro Brian Rogers Stephen Syratt Don Wallis Dave Ward Andrew Wilson Donna Geldenhuys
Mike Goodwin Brett Bosley Fraser Wilson Geoff Andrews Leo Meharry Glenn Snelgrove Rotorua Barry Huggins Mark Farrent Manu Rangiheuea Tony Markham Peter Merrie Wayne McIntyre Keith Waddell
A509201
A509201 File Reference: 1.00030 Significance of Decision: Receives Only - No Decisions
Report To: Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee
Meeting Date: 7 September 2010
Report From: Ken Tarboton, Group Manager Rivers and Drainage
Group Managers Report
Executive Summary
This paper provides a brief summary of key operational issues and achievements for the Regulation Monitoring and Operations Committee. This agenda item also provides the Committee with an opportunity to have further input into significant operational matters.
The paper follows the Council’s Ten Year Plan 2009 – 2019 programme structure but only those programmes that have items to report are included. Some of the items below may repeat information contained in “Councillor Catchup”. While this represents a degree repetition, inclusion in this agenda paper is intended as a means of formally presenting them to Council.
1 Recommendations
That the Regulation Monitoring & Operations Committee under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Group Managers Report.
2 Sustainable Communities
2.1 Eastern Bay of Plenty Science & Technology Fair
The Eastern Bay of Plenty Science and Technology Fair was held recently in Whakatāne with the top projects from schools’ fairs entered in the categories of Science, Research, Technology and Scientific Observational Drawing.
Environment Bay of Plenty's Best Environmental Entry Award was won by Kirsten Wesche, a Year 13 student from Whakatāne High School. Kirsten also won a Gold award in science as well as the Senior Science prize this year. Fantastic Fern or Feral Foe was Kirsten’s project studying Azolla.
In summarising her project she says “Azolla absorbs nutrients from the water but also has the unique ability to fix atmospheric nitrogen. I tested this tiny water fern to see if it could reduce the nitrogen levels present in nutrient rich water. My experiment revealed Azolla’s potential to be used to great effect in the restoration of lakes and ponds suffering from excess nutrient pollution. Using Azolla as a bio-filter could be a cost effective venture considering its follow-on applications, such as an organic fertiliser and supplementary animal feed which could bring in revenue. If setup and running costs could be recouped from the nutrient rich Azolla harvested, this method could fund itself or possibly even
80
A509201 become profitable. The use of Azolla as a bio-fertiliser on farms in the lake catchment would also reduce nutrient runoff further. I do not believe it is a stand-alone solution to the problem of Eutrophication in our lakes and ponds but could certainly be implemented alongside current methods”.
Kirsten has won Best Environmental Entry Award several times (and been Overall Winner of the Fair). Every project she has undertaken has had a strong environmental science basis and she has received excellent support from the team in our laboratory for all her projects.
Kirsten Wesche with her award wining project
3 Sustainable Land Management
3.1 Sea Lettuce Work Programme Update
Following a considerable amount of community discomfort with the scientific understanding of sea lettuce bloom in Tauranga Harbour staff have initiated the following studies to improve our understanding of the factors triggering sea lettuce blooms in Tauranga Harbour and to better understand the impact these blooms have on the ecology of the harbour.
Use of stable isotopes to understand the role of nutrients
Comprehensive sampling of sea lettuce, water and wastewater was completed in summer to determine whether measurement of stable isotopes (including nitrogen) can improve
81
A509201 our understanding of nutrient dynamics and sea lettuce development in the harbour. Further sampling will be completed this winter and the work is expected to be reported before the end of this year.
Impacts of sea lettuce mats on benthic communities in Tauranga Harbour
A PhD scholarship has been agreed with the University of Waikato under the support of the Coastal Chair and Intercoast. The objectives of the research are to examine the effects of sea lettuce mats on benthic communities and sediment nutrient cycling across a range of inter-tidal habitats (sandflats, cockle beds, sea grass meadows). Specifically the project will aim to:
(a) Quantify the impacts of sea lettuce mats on benthic species diversity and sediment nutrient fluxes in different habitats. (b) Document the rate of recovery (both in terms of species diversity and sediment nutrient fluxes) following removal of sea lettuce mats in different benthic habitats. (c) Determine if sea lettuce is readily incorporated into benthic food webs and thus made available to higher order consumers. Laboratory and data analysis will be undertaken by the student in Germany with INTERCOAST collaborators.
Nutrient and Sea Lettuce dynamics in Tauranga harbour
A second PhD scholarship has also been agreed with the University of Waikato to model the drivers of sea lettuce production in the Southern Basin of Tauranga Harbour. This work will use modelling software and techniques similar to those currently being used by the Lakes Chair to understand nutrient dynamics, ecology and hydrology in the Rotorua Lakes. The study has four objectives;
(a) Attempt to predict sea lettuce growth using parameters derived from the literature. (b) Model nutrient dynamics in the southern basin using data on temperature, salinity, oxygen, chlorophyll-a and nutrients. (c) Use existing Regional Council data and some new sampling information to validate the model. (d) Use the calibrated model to understand the importance of different nutrient sources for sea lettuce production and to predict future blooms and the main zones of accumulation within the harbour.
Update on the Regional Council Chair in Coastal Science
The University of Waikato has completed interviews for the Chair in Coastal Science. The standard of applicants was extremely high and an announcement on the successful candidate is expected in September.
3.2 Rook update
A Waihī Beach resident contacted Council in July to report a rook sighting. Staff have investigated the sighting but as yet have been unable to confirm it. Given the sighting location is close to the regional boundary with Waikato we are also liaising with their Biosecurity staff and will be jointly running articles in the Katikati Advertiser and the Waihī Leader with the aim of gathering more information. It is possible that this sighting was an itinerant bird that is no longer in the area.
82
A509201 Staff are also currently attempting to poison approximately 40 rooks on Rangitāiki Station (East Taupō). These birds have been feeding well on pre-feed baits, but we are having difficulties in getting to feed on poison baits. This work has been well supported by the landowner who is providing staff time to assist with pre-feeding work.
The only other known population of rooks in the Bay of Plenty consists of seven birds on the south-western edge of Rotorua city. So far this year, there have been no opportunities to control these birds, but we are continually monitoring this situation.
3.3 Benchmarking of the Rotorua catchment
Benchmarking of the Lake Rotorua catchment land commenced in February 2010. The aim of this project was to target the most critical properties within the catchment. Rule 11 requires that all properties over 4000 m² be benchmarked. The target for the benchmarking was set by the RMO committee to benchmark the 100 largest properties within an 18 month time frame. This report is aimed at presenting progress towards that target.
Staff have started work in the Utuhina, Waiowhiro, Ngongotahā and Waititi catchments. They have found the need to approach more catchments as many farmers are not in a position to work with us immediately but have indicated that they will provide info at a later date as time permits.
Prior to starting each catchment staff have held a meeting with property owners where the property exceeds 70 ha. Where a land owner has other land outside the target catchment staff work with them to get that land benchmarked at the same time. This has resulted in all the CHH and DoC (ungrazed) land being benchmarked.
To date 19 properties have completed benchmarks and a further 16 are well advanced toward completing the process. To date one farmer has indicating he would prefer to apply for resource consent rather than supply the required information. Several dairy farmers have been benchmarked so they can proceed with a sale and purchase agreement, or redevelopment of a farming operation. The discussions relating to the formation of a collective approach by dairy farmers to nutrient management (the Dairy Club concept) has delayed officers approaching dairy farmers as a group.
At this stage we have not encountered any significant resistance to the benchmarking process from farmers approached.
3.4 Lake Okataina hornwort incursion weed cordon
As reported at the last Committee meeting, staff currently working to eradicate an incursion of hornwort recently discovered in Lake Okataina. One of the interventions we proposed was putting in place a weed cordon across the bay containing the largest infestation to minimise risks of any hornwort fragments spreading from the site into the lake. This cordon has been completed and is now in place. As mentioned at the last meeting, in response to questions from Councillors, we are have modified the original design to further limit the possibility on small fragments breaching the cordon by integrating shadecloth into the top portion of the cordon.
83
A509201
Lake Ōkataina Hornwort weed cordon
Underwater detail of Hornwort weed cordon
84
A509201 3.5 Wild about weeds workshops
These popular workshops are being held during conservation week, Thursday 16 and Friday 17 September. The 3-hour workshops cover 20 of the most common and serious weeds of the western Bay of Plenty. They also cover different methods of controlling weeds including information on chemical control. The workshops are free and open to agency staff and the general public.
3.6 Rabbit control operations on the Matakana sand dunes
Rabbits, even at very low numbers seriously damage sand dunes by eating the sand binding plants pingao and spinifex and therefore exacerbating erosion. Rabbit poison operations on the Matakana sand dunes have been carried out in selected areas for the past three years.
The entire island coastline is monitored annually and all areas showing rabbit damage are programmed for control the following winter. The main areas of concern have been the dotterel breeding sites at Panepane (southern end of the island near Mauao) and Waikoura (northern end of the island near Bowentown). The control of rabbit’s natural predators in these areas has meant that rabbit populations can exponentially increase.
Pindone pellets have been used in this operation and results have been very good. The cost of the work has been shared between the forestry landowners and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. Results have been spectacular with the sand binding plants spinifex and pingao re-establishing and the dunes once again accreting.
Waikoura, northern Matakana Island, before rabbit control in September 2007.
85
A509201
Waikoura, following three years annual rabbit control operations, August 2010. Pingao and spinifex is re-establishing and the dunes once again accreting.
3.7 Planting at Pāpāmoa Hills Regional Park
The planting of almost 15,000 native trees at Papamoa Hills Regional Park took place in early August as part of the seasonal planting programme. The trees were planted in two steep areas to enhance the existing biodiversity of the park and to protect archaeological sites from potential erosion. This includes two large pā sites and a variety of archaeological features.
As part of the planting operations, a fenceline has been removed from the middle of a prominent pā site. This is the first fenceline to be removed from a pā site in the park and will allow better management of the archeology and cultural values.
In addition to the seasonal planting programme, 200 trees will be planted on Sunday 19 September by local community members at the park. This community event is part of the wider community engagement programme for Papamoa Hills and is supported by Te Puke Forest and Bird and Wildland Consultants. Both organisations have provided the trees that will be planted on the day. The planting day is also part of the Tauranga activities for the national Conservation Week on 12 – 19 September 2010.
86
A509201
Planting site 6B at Papamoa Hills Regional Park – one of the two planting sites for 2010
The new fenceline at planting site 6B. Note the removed fenceline through the pā site.
87
A509201 3.8 Honda Treefund update
Thanks to the generosity of Honda NZ Ltd, infestations of roadside weeds have once again been replaced with native plants as part of the Honda Treefund Project.
New plantings were made at Tarukenga near Rotorua, Ohope and Mangatawa east of Mount Maunganui. More than 25,000 native flaxes and shrubs have been planted at 20 roadside locations in the Bay of Plenty region. Unsightly weeds such as gorse, blackberry, privet and moth plant have been removed. The Honda Treefund Project started in 2005.
The largest planting sites are at Barkes Corner, Tauranga, and along State Highway 2 in the Athenree Gorge, where plantings stretch over a one kilometre length of roadside verge on each side of the road.
Other partners in the Honda Treefund Project include district councils and road and rail agencies. Bay of Plenty Regional Council coordinates planting projects using the Honda Treefund in the Bay of Plenty region. This is managed through the Biosecurity Programme while the ongoing management costs are funded by the district councils, and road and rail authority partners.
There will unfortunately be a reduction in the number of native plants for the 2011 planting season as the number of new Honda cars sold has dropped due to the global recession. Honda NZ Ltd and people purchasing new Honda cars make a donation to the fund when buying a new vehicle.
Honda Treefund planting site at Barkes Corner, Tauranga planted in 2006.
88
A509201
Honda Treefund planting site at Barkes Corner, Tauranga planted in 2007.
Honda Treefund planting site at Tarukenga, in partnership with the Ngongotaha Rail Trust.
3.9 Pikowai vehicle access to dunes
Forest and Bird Eastern Branch were successful in an EEF application to protect dotterel habitat along the Pikowai straits. Part of the work for this project includes the address to ongoing vehicle access issues along this part of the beach.
89
A509201 Forest and Bird are working with Whakatane District Council (WDC) on this EEF project. Council will be aware that the vast majority of vehicle use in the Pikowai beach area is for surfcasting or simply for off-road recreational driving. According to the WDC Reserves Bylaw neither is permitted. The bylaw has been in place since 1997, but has to date been unpoliced. Aside from the Pikowai Camp Ground, there are two official carparks (White Sands and Murphy’s).
WDC has in the past attempted to restrict vehicle access on a number of occasions. In each case wooden barriers had been vandalised and fences have been cut. WDC does not have the funding to actively police the area. Given this history, the EEF project has been scaled down to focus on the main issues facing the dotterels. This will focus on the area in between the two car parks.
It should be noted that this part of the beach is experiencing a flow-on effect from Western Bay users displaced by beach access restrictions elsewhere. Innovative solutions to managing vehicle access to the dunes are currently being thought through before any action is taken.
4 Sustainable Air Management
4.1 Ngapuna Sawmill Boiler Review
4.1.1 Background
Part of the Rotorua Air Quality Action Plan implementation was to assess the boiler operation of major industry in the area. This was brought forward to coincide with the consents’ team review of their conditions, and due to several summer exceedances in the area.
In the past, Tachikawa Forest Products (NZ) Limited (Tachikawa) has experienced issues with their boiler, leading to increased emissions and public complaints. Prior to this review process, Tachikawa investigated these issues and took action to reduce emissions. This included tuning and optimising the boiler operation, and covering their fuel supply. No further problems have been recorded from this boiler, and it is currently operating below the consent condition limit.
McAlpines Rotorua Limited (McAlpines) declined to participate in the boiler review, however they propose to install a wet scrubber to reduce their emissions. The consents team are currently coordinating this process.
Tachikawa consented to have their 8 megawatt boiler operations reviewed, and allowed our contractor access to their site to carry out the assessment.
4.1.2 Comment
We received the final report in June 2010.
There are several factors which can lead to increased emissions from the boiler including fuel control, plant operation, and maintenance of emissions control equipment.
Tachikawa previously made improvements to its fuel storage facilities and plant operation including covering fuel, tuning the boiler, and ensuring the optimum fuel mix for efficient burning. Multi-cyclones remove particulates from the process.
The conclusions of the report are summarised as follows:
90
A509201 • The boiler has been tuned for optimum performance for the fuel mixture • Fuel mixes with a high proportion of sawdust are not recommended, and the wood waste should be blended well with bark and chips • The boiler operators are experienced with ensuring good operation is achieved • Regular tuning of the boiler is recommended as a part of its routine maintenance programme • No modification or improvements are recommended as the boiler is currently achieving concentrations below consent conditions Options for reducing emissions were also investigated. Options include wet scrubbers, bag house filtration, and electrostatic precipitation. Each technology has its own advantages and disadvantages, and removes different percentages of particulates.
4.1.3 Conclusion
Staff have considered the findings of the report and consider that no additional emission reduction procedures or equipment is required. This is only if the operating conditions are maintained as they are described in the report.
Likewise, provided McAlpines install wet scrubbers as proposed, no further alterations to their boiler will be required.
The emission reduction suggestions are valuable and will be kept in mind for future implementation if necessary.
Emphasis now shifts to the analysis of the site assessments in the area. Once analysis is complete, we will develop appropriate actions aimed at reducing emissions in Ngapuna.
4.1.4 Next steps
The next steps are to:
• Engage with Tachikawa Forest Products (NZ) Limited on the results, specifically optimum operating practice • Continue to work with McAlpines Rotorua Limited with respect to installing a wet scrubber as part of their consenting process • Identify other sources of emissions in the Ngāpuna area and work towards reducing emissions from these sources
5 Regional Monitoring
5.1 Mamaku Weather Radar
A visit to new weather radar being constructed in the Mamaku’s was undertaken in mid- August. The radar is located near Mamaku Village to the west of Rotorua and has a measurement range of 300km. The radar will provide enhanced weather information for the Bay of Plenty and southern Waikato regions.
The weather radar became operational on the 24th of August and is due to be officially launched in September.
The radar equipment is made in Finland while the dome structure that surrounds it is made in Italy. The radar dish within the dome weighs 1300 kg and performs a series of
91
A509201 sweeps every 30 seconds at angles from horizontal to 22 degrees to build a full picture of weather conditions every 7 minutes.
The cost of this new weather radar is approximately $2.6m funded from MetsService revenue, predominantly from a contract with the Minister of Transport.
Mamaku weather radar
Mamaku weather radar output
92
A509201 5.2 Updated on 2010 Hicane Spray season
The 2010 Hicane spraying season got underway in the second week of July with the first spraying of Zespri Gold variety fruit. Spraying of Green variety began in early August. The season is now almost ended with only a few remaining blocks still being sprayed in the last week of August.
Following the high level of community concern in 2009 (protest marches, “Hui on Hicane” etc) council staff set up a meeting of all parties in September 2009 to identify ways that the kiwifruit growing and spray contracting industry could work with the regional council, iwi and community groups to minimise the incidence and impacts of spray drift. Twenty one people including Councillors Nees, Bennett and Noble attended that meeting. Out of that meeting a Hicane / Spraydrift Action Group was formed. The role of that group is to implement the actions identified at the September 2009 meeting. The Action Group meets approximately two to three monthly and has been the vehicle through which all of the initiatives below have been implemented.
Pollution Prevention team members gave presentations on the Regional Air Plan requirements to the Zespri / NZKGI organised pre-season meetings of contractors and growers at Katikati and Te Puke yesterday. The purpose of these meetings was for Zespri, NZ Kiwifruit Growers Inc (NZKGI) and Bay of Plenty Regional Council to explain best spray practice, regional air plan requirements and the need for compliance. We also explained to the meetings that this year we will be using honorary wardens to assist with the complaint response and flowing from this there is an expectation that the level of enforcement will increase.
Pollution Prevention staff trained selected kiwifruit growers (honorary wardens) to respond to complaints and collect information in situations where regional council staff are not able to respond immediately. Approximately 30 NZKGI reps from throughout the region were trained and have been responding where appropriate. In addition, several NZ Post rural delivery drivers were trained to collect information (to a standard acceptable for enforcement) in cases where they observe spray drift beyond orchard boundaries during their rounds. There will be no cost to Council from either of these groups responding/collecting information for us.
In the Te Puna area we have engaged the services of two staff of Pirirakau Inc to perform the same complaint response role as the NZKGI reps. The Pirirakau reps are also running a trial in the Te Puna area whereby contractors/spray applicators will use specially marked yellow warning cones to alert passing traffic / cyclists / pedestrians / school children that spraying is in progress. The trial also includes an educational component with presentations to the community and school children.
The action group has lobbied to get a spray contractors forum set up and to get a representative of the spray contractors group onto the Spray drift / Hicane Action Group.
The action group has also been involved in putting pressure on the industry to increase the uptake of Air Inclusion (AI) spray nozzle technology amongst growers, contractors and other applicators. It is now likely that Zespri will move to make the use of AI nozzles and low drift spray additives mandatory as from 30 June 2011.
The Regional Council Communications team has been working together with the Zespri Communications team on joint media publicity, both pre season and throughout the season.
Throughout the season there has been a weekly teleconference between the Spray drift / Hicane Action Group members to keep communication channels open.
93
A509201 This year there have been two protest actions, one by a group of about eight to ten protesters in Te Puke and another outside the Zespri Offices, Mount Maunganui, attended by a group of about 20 protesters.
As of Wednesday 25 August, there had been 23 complaints received during the 2010 Hicane spraying season. This is significantly more than in the previous three seasons, however it is important to note that this year Council has extensively promoted the Pollution Hotline number for spray drift complaints. Fifteen of the complaints related to lack of notification as required by the Regional Air Plan, four alleged spray drift onto neighbouring property and another four related to possible spray drift e.g. complainant could smell chemicals and they were aware that spraying was being carried out in vicinity.
A verbal update on complaints received to the end of the spraying season will be provided at the committee meeting.
6 Rivers, Drainage and Flood Management
6.1 Okere and Ohau Structure Consent
Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s Rivers and Drainage Group lodged its updated consent application to the Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s Consents Section on Friday 13 August 2010. The original application was lodged in December 2009 and since then the Rivers and Drainage Group have carried out further consultation with major representative stakeholders. This has resulted in a significant number of changes to its application. Major representative stakeholders include Rivers and Drainage Group partner Te Arawa Lakes Trust, the Lake Rotoiti Community Association and Ngāti Pikiao.
The Regional Council’s Consents Section have commissioned various independent technical reviews of the consent application which should be completed by the end of August 2010. If no major issues arise as a result of these reviews then the Consents Section will publicly notify the application in early September 2010. Resolution of any questions that arise during the technical reviews may cause the application to change. If the application changes, the Rivers and Drainage Group will inform major representative stakeholders of any proposed changes beforehand.
Following notification, interested parties will have 20 working days to make a submission to the Consents Section on the application.
6.2 Ōhau Channel Flush Test
As part of the consultation process a flushing trial was undertaken following a request from Ngati Pikiao who believe that sedimentation had increased in the Ohau Channel. Ngati Pikiao believes sedimentation has reduced the flow velocity in the channel and increased the flood risk to nearby properties at Mourea and Te Takinga. The trial flush of the Ohau Channel involved removing the stoplogs at Ohau Weir and lifting the Okere Gates clear of the water surface (i.e. gates fully open).
The purpose of the trial was to confirm whether flushes could; transport excess sediment along the channel, increase channel flow velocities, reduce channel water levels and break up and disperse algae out of Okere Arm. Initial results of the trial undertaken from 14 to 20 June 2010 (more fully reported to the Māori Committee) showed that the Ohau Channel can be flushed, and water levels in the channel reduced evenly along its length except at the Ohau Weir structure. Further analysis is still being undertaken to determine conclusively the amount of sediment moved. Anecdotal feedback is that the trial was successful in removing both algae and sediment.
94
A509201
A follow up trial flush has been requested by Ngāti Pikiao and will be undertaken as soon as weather conditions permit. In this follow up trial, Lake Rotoiti will be lowered more slowly so as to not adversely affect recreational users of the Kaituna River downstream of the Okere Gates.
6.3 August Flood event
Significant rainfall over the month of August and more particularly over the weekend or 13 -15 August resulted in activation of our flood room, and responding to the event. Issues associated with this event and our response to it is described in the separate report to this committee.
7 Financial Implications
Current Budget
Current budget implications are presented in the relevant sections of this report.t
Future Implications
Future budget implications are presented in the relevant sections of this report..
Ten Year / Annual Plan Implications
Ten Year/Annual Plan implications are presented in the relevant sections of this report..
Ken Tarboton Group Manager Rivers and Drainage
19 August 2010
95
A509201
A509201