WCO Ngaruroro and Clive Rivers

ANALYSIS OF SUBMISSIONS

Water Conservation Order: The Ngaruroro and Clive rivers and associated water bodies

Analysis of Submissions on Re-Notified Application

September 2018

Executive Summary

In December 2015, the Minister for the Environment received an application from the New Zealand Fish and Game Council, the Hawke’s Bay Fish and Game Council, Ngāti Hori ki Kohupatiki, Whitewater New Zealand, Jet Boating New Zealand, and the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand (the applicants), for a Water Conservation Order for the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers (WCO or ‘the Order’).

The application concerns the entire length of the Ngaruroro River, the tributaries and hydraulically connected groundwater to the Lower Ngaruroro River, and the 7 kilometre (km) long Clive River. The applicants seek protection for a range of values through a number of conditions contained in the draft Order appended to the application.

The Minister for the Environment appointed a Special Tribunal (the Tribunal) to hear and report on the application. The Tribunal may consider matters wider than the matters raised in the application. The EPA publically notified the Application on 28 July 2017 and called for submissions. The formal submissions period closed at 4pm on 24 August 2017. The EPA received 388 submissions.

Recent scientific evidence confirmed that wider hydraulic connections exist through the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers catchment, than was understood when the application was first notified. As a result of this new evidence, the Special Tribunal decided on 18 June 2018 that further public notification was required.

A second public notification occurred on 24 July 2018, and closed on 22 August 2018. The EPA received 346 additional submissions before the close of the submission period. Five of these submissions were duplicates or doubles, and were removed. One was a late submission was received on 30 August. Nine submissions were from submitters who had submitted in the first round of submissions. 319 submissions were sent to the EPA via the Forest and Bird web page; all of which supported the Order.

This analysis relates to the submissions received in the second public notification and should be read in conjunction with the analysis of submissions on the first public notification1.

Position on the application:

 13 submitters (3.8%) oppose the application.  5 submitters (1.4%) were neutral on the application.  321 submitters (94.4%) support the application.  1 submitters (0.3%) support with a preference for preserving another water body.  1 submitters (0.3%) support with a preference for preserving different features/qualities.  0 submitters (0%) did not specify or clarify a view on the application.

1 The analysis of submissions on the first public notification can be found at: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/FileAPI/proposal/NSP000041/Submissions-and-or-comments/NSP000041-WCN-Analysis-of- Submissions-12092017.pdf

Tribunal recommendation sought:

 12 submitters would like the Tribunal to recommend that the WCO be declined (3.5%).  320 submitters would like the Tribunal to recommend that the WCO be granted (94.1%).  4 submitters would like the Tribunal to recommend that the WCO be granted with changes (1.1%).  4 submitters were neutral on what the Tribunal should recommend (1.1%).  1 submitters did not specify or clearly identify a view whether the Tribunal should recommend that the WCO be granted, granted with changes or declined (0.2%).

Additional submitters wishing to be heard:

 20 submitters (5.7%) have indicated that they wish to be heard at the hearing.  320 submitters (94.1%) have indicated that they do not wish to be heard at the hearing.  1 submitters (0.2%) did not specify or clarify if they wished to be heard.  Of the 341 submitters, one indicated that if others make a similar submission they will consider presenting a joint case.

Location: The majority of additional submitters are from:

 Auckland (28.9%),  Wellington (11.8%),  Hastings (9.2%),  Canterbury (8.1%),  Waikato (6.3%),  Bay of Plenty (4.6%),  Napier City (4.6%),  Manawatu/ Wanganui (4%),  Otago (3.7%),  Taranaki (3.1%), and  N/A (1.1%)

The other 14% was spread out over many regions.

Sector:

 320 submitters (94.1%) identified as individuals.  13 submitters (3.7%) identified as organisations.  0 submitters (0%) identified as community groups.  0 submitters (0%) identified as local government agencies.  1 submitters (0.2%) identified as iwi.  7 submitter (2.0%) were not-specified.

A range of opinions have been raised in the submissions, primarily on topics around: alternative processes for catchment management; commercial and industrial operations (including social impacts); water quality, water quantity; recreation; ecology; natural character/amenity; consents and restrictions; groundwater/aquifers/surface water; river conservation; and culture/heritage.

Contents List of Tables ...... 5 1. Explanatory Information ...... 6 1.1 Use of this document ...... 6 1.2 Administration ...... 6 1.3 Limitations ...... 6 2. Introduction ...... 7 2.1 Application Background ...... 7 2.2 Notification of the Application ...... 7 2.3 Second Notification ...... 8 3. Submissions received...... 8 4. Overview of Submissions ...... 8 4.1 Position of submitters on re-notified application ...... 8 4.2 Recommendation sought on the application by submitters ...... 9 5. Trends observed in submissions ...... 10 5.1 Submitters wishing to be heard ...... 10 5.2 Location ...... 10 5.3 Submissions by sector ...... 11 6. Submissions sent via Forest and Bird web page ...... 12 6.1 Commercial and industrial operations and consequential impacts ...... 12 6.1.1 Concern for the environment ...... 13 6.2 Culture and Heritage ...... 16 6.3 Water Quality ...... 17 6.3.1 Irrigation ...... 17 6.4 River Conservation ...... 17 6.4.1 Protection ...... 17 6.4.2 Future Generations ...... 19 6.4.3 Other ...... 21 6.5 Water Sports ...... 23 6.6 Fishing ...... 24 6.7 Water Quality ...... 25 6.8 Ecology ...... 26 6.9 Other Recreation ...... 30 6.10 Natural Characteristics and Amenity ...... 32 7. Other Submitters ...... 35 7.1 Commercial and Industrial Operations and Consequential Impacts ...... 35 7.1.1 Adverse Impacts on Commercial and Industrial Operations ...... 35 7.1.2 Consequential Social Impacts ...... 36 7.2 Alternative Processes for catchment management ...... 36 7.2.1 TANK ...... 36 7.2.2 Catchment management and planning ...... 37 7.2.3 Science and Technology ...... 38 7.3 Water Quality ...... 39 7.3.1 Irrigation ...... 39 7.4 River Conservation ...... 39 7.4.1 Rivers Not Outstanding ...... 39 7.4.2 Rivers Outstanding ...... 40 7.4.3 FutureGenerations ...... 40 7.4.4 Other ...... 41 7.5 Aquifers, Groundwater, and Surface Water ...... 41 7.5.1 Lack of understanding ...... 41 7.5.2 Protection of the Aquifer system ...... 42 7.6 Consent and Resource Management ...... 42 7.7 Fishing ...... 43 7.8 Other recreation ...... 43 7.9 Ecology ...... 44 8. Requested Changes and Comments to the Tribunal ...... 46 Appendix 1: Full List of Submitters ...... 48 Full List (alphabetically) ...... 48

List of Tables

Table 1 Submitter Position ...... 9 Table 2 Submitter Recommendation ...... 9 Table 3 Submitters who wish to be heard ...... 10 Table 4 Submissions by location ...... 10 Table 5 Submissions by sector and position (first notification) ...... 11 Table 6 Submissions by sector and position (second notification) ...... 12 Table 7 Submitters on issues relating to commercial and industrial operations...... 15 Table 8 Submitters on issues relating to culture and heritage ...... 16 Table 9 Submitters on issues relating to water quality ...... 17 Table 10 Submitters on issues relating to river conservation ...... 21 Table 11 Submitters on issues relating to water sports ...... 24 Table 12 Submitters on issues relating to fishing ...... 25 Table 13 Submitters on issues relating to water quality ...... 25 Table 14: Submitters on issues relating to ecology ...... 29 Table 15 Submitters on issues relating to other recreation ...... 31 Table 16 Submitters on issues relating to natural characteristics and amenity ...... 34 Table 17 Submitters on issues relating to commercial and industrial operations ...... 36 Table 18 Submitters on issues relating to alternative processes for catchment management ...... 38 Table 19 Submitters on issues relating to water quality ...... 39 Table 20 Submitters on issues relating to river conservation ...... 41 Table 21 Submitters on issues relating to aquifers, groundwater, and surface water ...... 42 Table 22 Submitters on issues relating to consent and resource management ...... 43 Table 23 Submitters on issues relating to fishing ...... 43 Table 24 Submitters on issues relating to other recreation ...... 44 Table 25 Submitters on issues relating to ecology ...... 45 Table 26 Requested changes and comments to the WCO by submitters ...... 46

1. Explanatory Information

1.1 Use of this document The purpose of this report is to assist the Tribunal and parties to the hearing process. The information provided in this report is as follows:

Executive Summary Section 1 Outlines the purpose, structure, and limitations of this report. Section 2 Provides background on the Application and the submission process. Section 3 Provides information on the submissions received. Section 4 Provides an overview of the submissions. Section 5 Identifies trends within submissions including the number of submitters that wish to be heard at the hearing, where submitters are located and whether submitters are individuals, groups, or organisations. Section 6 Contains a summary of the types of matters raised across a number of Forest and Bird submissions and identifies many of the submissions that raised that matter. Section 7 Contains a summary of the types of matters raised across a number of Non-Forest and Bird submissions and identifies many of the submissions that raised that matter. Appendix 1 Provides the full list of submitters (alphabetically).

1.2 Administration Each submitter is referenced by their organisation name (where applicable), or by their surname(s), and then by their first name(s). Each submitter has also been assigned an EPA submitter reference number for administrative purposes.

This analysis of submissions provides an overview of the submissions received in the second public notification of the Water Conservation Order, and outlines the general opinions provided in these submissions. The themes described within this report reflect the views represented by submitters, and do not reflect any view of the EPA.

1.3 Limitations Identification of trends and concerns within this report are based on information provided by submitters in their written submissions.

This report provides an objective analysis of the statistics of the submissions and does not advocate any particular view over another.

The analysis was produced using a combination of computer generated data and manual checking to analyse the submissions.

It is not unusual for submissions received on applications of this nature to cover a broad range of issues and offer differing levels of detail. Although each submission is unique, an analysis of the submissions necessarily involves a degree of generalisation. Summaries of matters raised and

6 conditions proposed are therefore not a replication of, and not intended to replace, original submissions.

The trends and common matters raised are summarised in Section 5 and are based solely on the content of submissions. The analysis contains only matters raised across a number of submissions and may not refer to all matters raised.

2. Introduction 2.1 Application Background In December 2015, the Minister for the Environment received an application from the New Zealand Fish and Game Council, the Hawke’s Bay Fish and Game Council, Ngāti Hori ki Kohupatiki, Whitewater New Zealand, Jet Boating New Zealand, and the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand (the applicants), for a Water Conservation Order for the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers (WCO or ‘the Order’).

a) significance in accordance with tikanga Māori; b) cultural and spiritual purposes; c) habitat for rainbow trout; d) rainbow trout fishery; e) angling, amenity and recreation; f) habitat for avifauna; g) habitat for native fish; h) whitewater kayaking and rafting amenity and recreation; i) jetboating amenity and recreation; j) wild, scenic and natural characteristics; and k) scientific and ecological values.

The applicants seek protection of these values through a number of conditions contained in a draft Order appended to the application.

The Minister for the Environment appointed a Special Tribunal to hear and report on the application. The Tribunal may consider matters wider than the matters raised in the application.

2.2 Notification of the Application The EPA publically notified the Application on 28 July 2017 and called for submissions. The formal submissions period closed at 4pm on 24 August 2017. The EPA received 388 submissions before the close of the submission period. A separate analysis of the earlier submissions is available at: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/FileAPI/proposal/NSP000041/Submissions-and-or- comments/NSP000041-WCN-Analysis-of-Submissions-12092017.pdf

2.3 Second Notification As of the 18 June 20182 recent scientific evidence confirmed that wider hydraulic connections exist through the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers catchment, than was understood when the application was first notified. As a result of this new evidence, the Special Tribunal decided that the application should be re-notified.

The public notice of the re-notified application was published in the New Zealand Herald, Dominion Post, Christchurch Press, Otago Daily Times, Central Hawke's Bay Mail, Hastings Leader, Hawke's Bay Today, Manawatū Standard and Taupō Times on 24 July 2018. The public notice was also published in the Napier Courier on 25 July 2018.

Copies of the re-notified application, public notice, submission form and information sheet were made available on the EPA website, or by link from the EPA website, and in hardcopy at the following locations:

 Napier Public Library (1 Tennyson Street);  Hastings Public Library (corner of Eastbourne Street East and Warren Street South);  Waipukurau Public Library (Kitchener Street);  Waipawa Public Library (64 High Street); or  the Environmental Protection Authority (Level 10, 215 Lambton Quay,Wellington).

Submissions on the re-notified application could be made via the EPA’s online submission form, by email, or by hard copy delivered by post, email, or delivered in person to the EPA or to the Applicant.

Submissions opened on the re-notified application on 25 July 2018 and closed on the 22 of August 2018. The EPA received 341 submissions before the close of the submission period.

3. Submissions received

As of the close of submission period (22 August 2018) the EPA received 346 complete submissions in total, including five which were duplicates or double submissions, and one late submission (see Appendix 1). This includes submissions the EPA received by post that were date stamped on or before the date of submissions closing, as well as submissions that were incomplete when first received, but where the EPA was able to contact the submitter and additional information was provided by the submitter before the close of the submission period. This calculation excludes any duplicate submissions which were collated.

4. Overview of Submissions 4.1 Position of submitters on re-notified application The submission form asked submitters to indicate whether they support; support but prefer to preserve a different but related water body in the same catchment; support but prefer to preserve different features or qualities of the water body; oppose; or are neutral with regards to their view on the

2 See ‘Decision of Special Tribunal on Further Notification’ Dated: 18 June 2018: www.epa.govt.nz/public-consultations/in- progress/water-conservation-order-ngaruroro-and-clive-rivers/

8 application. Submitters indicated their position by using the check boxes in the submission form. The responses are outlined below for both notifications.

Table 1 Submitter Position Original Notification Re-Notified Combined Position Application 122 Submitters 13 Submitters (3.8%) 135 Submitters Oppose the application (31.4%) (18.4%) 5 Submitters (1.3%) 5 Submitters (1.4%) 10 Submitters Neutral on the application (1.3%) 119 Submitters 321 Submitters (94.2%) 440 Submitters Support the application (30.7%) (60.3%) 8 Submitters (2.1%) 1 Submitters (0.3%) 9 Submitters (1.2%) Support with a preference for preserving another water body 4 Submitter (1.0%) 1 Submitter (0.3%) 5 Submitters (0.6%) Support with a preference for preserving different features/qualities 130 Submitters 0 Submitters (0%) 130 Submitters Did not specify or clarify a view (33.5%) (17.8%) 288 Submitters 341 Submitters 729 Submitters Total

4.2 Recommendation sought on the application by submitters Submitters were asked to indicate the recommendation they would like the Tribunal to make to the Minister for the Environment. Submitters indicated their recommendation by using the check boxes in the submission form. The responses are outlined below for both notifications.

Table 2 Submitter Recommendation

Original Re-Notified Combined Recommendation Notification Application 73 Submitters 12 Submitters 85 Submitters Tribunal to recommend that the WCO be (18.8%) (3.4%) (11.6%) declined 89 Submitters (23%) 320 Submitters 409 Submitters Tribunal to recommend that the WCO be (93.9%) (56.0%) granted 70 Submitters (18%) 4 Submitters (1.1%) 74 Submitters Tribunal to recommend that the WCO be (10.1%) granted with changes 3 Submitters (0.8%) 4 Submitters (1.1%) 7 Submitters Neutral on what the Tribunal should (0.9%) recommend 153 Submitters 1 Submitters (0.2%) 154 Submitters Did not specify or clearly identify a view (39.4%) (21.1%)

5. Trends observed in submissions

5.1 Submitters wishing to be heard For the original notification 239 (61.6%) indicated in their submission that they wish to be heard at the hearing. 129 submitters (33.3%) indicated in their submission that they do not wish to be heard at the hearing. 20 submitters (5.2%) did not specify whether they wish to be heard.

65 submitters stated that if others made a similar submission, they would consider presenting a joint case with them at the hearing.

For the second notification 20 (5.7%) submitters indicated that they wished to be heard at the hearing. 319 (93.8%) indicated in their submission that they did not wish to be heard, and 2 (0.5%) did not specify.

One specific submitter from the second notification stated that if others made a similar submission, they would consider presenting a joint case with them at the hearing.

The EPA will provide all submitters who indicated they wish to be heard at the hearing, with the opportunity to confirm their intention to appear at the hearing.

Table 3 Submitters who wish to be heard

Original Notification Re-Notified Application Combined Wish to be Heard 239 Submitters (61.6%) 20 Submitters (5.7%) 259 Submitters Yes (35.5%)

129 Submitters (33.3%) 319 Submitters (93.9%) 448 Submitters No (61.5%)

20 Submitters (5.2%) 2 Submitters (0.5%) 22 Submitters (3.0%) N/A

5.2 Location The majority of submitters from the original notification were from the Hastings District (56.4%) and Napier City (15.5%) areas. In the second notification the majority of the submitters came from outside the Hawke’s bay region (only 13.9% from the Hawke’s bay region). The following table identifies the submitters from each area, or relevant geographic area.

Table 4 Submissions by location Second Original Notification Location notification Location 219 (56.4%) Auckland 100 (28.9%) Hastings 60 (15.5%) Wellington 41 (11.8%) Napier City 21 (5.4%) Hastings 32 (9.2%) Auckland 19 (4.9%) Canterbury 28 (8.1%) Wellington

10 (2.6%) Waikato 22 (6.3%) Central Hawkes Bay 9 (2.3%) Bay of Plenty 16 (4.6%) Taupo 8 (2.1%) Napier City 16 (4.6%) Canterbury 7 (1.8%) Manawatu/Wanganui 14 (4.0%) Bay of Plenty 5 (1.3%) Otago 13 (3.7%) Manawatu/Wanganui 1 (0.3%) Taranaki 11 (3.1%) Rangitikei 12 (3.1%) Nelson (10), Northland (8), (14.2%) Other (Nelson (1), Northland Australia (6), Central (1), Otago (2), Sweden (1), Hawkes Bay (5), Taranaki (2), Waikato (2), West Marlborough (4), Gisborne Coast, South Island (2), (3), Taupo (2), Tasman (2), Gisborne (1) Southland (2), United Kingdom (2), United States (2), West Coast (1), Germany (1), Netherlands (1). 17 (4.4%) Not Stated 4 (1.1%) Not Stated

5.3 Submissions by sector The majority of submissions in the first notification were from individuals (48.7%), and then organisations (44.6%). In the second notification the vast majority were individuals (94.2%) followed by organisations (3.7%), not specified (1.7%) and iwi (0.2%). The following table identifies the submitters from each sector in terms of their position on the application.

Table 5 Submissions by sector and position (first notification) Number of Recommendation Sought Sector submissions Grant Grant with Decline Neutral

Changes 189 (48.7%) 69 13 12 1 Individuals 173 (44.6%) 13 52 57 2 Organisations 9 (2.3%) 2 0 4 0 Community groups 8 (2.1%) 2 1 0 0 Local Government 8 (2.1%) 2 3 0 0 Iwi 1 (0.3%) 1 0 0 0 Not specified

Table 6 Submissions by sector and position (second notification) Number of Recommendation Sought Sector submissions Grant Grant with Decline Neutral

Changes 320 (93.8%) 310 1 7 1 (plus 1 Individuals N/A)

13 (3.8%) 2 3 5 3 Organisations 0 0 0 0 0 Community groups 0 0 0 0 0 Local Government 1 (0.2%) 1 0 0 0 Iwi 7 (2.0%) 7 0 0 0 Not specified

6. Submissions sent via Forest and Bird web page

319 of the 341 submissions received were sent to the EPA through the Forest and Bird web page, and used the following standard text:

I support this application because the Ngaruroro is an outstanding river from both a regional and national perspective. In its upper reaches, its pristine nature, habitat for native species, and recreational and scenic values make it particularly incredible. In its lower reaches it braided nature, habitat provision for native birds and fish, recreational values, and high water quality (particularly in comparison to other lowland rivers in New Zealand), make it noteworthy. Unfortunately, New Zealand has very few rivers like the Ngaruroro left. In recent history we have faced a national freshwater crisis, which has led to the mass degradation of lakes, rivers, and streams across New Zealand. It is pertinent that we protect any remaining outstanding natural assets, such as the Ngaruroro River, for future generations.

The submissions sent via the Forest and Bird web page often had personally added text in addition to the standard text noted above. Topics raised in this additional personal text are discussed in the following sections. This is not intended to provide a comprehensive account of all topics, aspects, concerns or requests raised in the additional text provided by these submissions, but rather to provide an overview of the range of views of submitters on this application.

It is noted that some topics do overlap e.g. those submitting on the topic of commercial and industrial operations are commonly referencing this in regard to water quantity and groundwater. In this case the submitters are captured under commercial and industrial operations only.

6.1 Commercial and industrial operations and consequential impacts Commercial and industrial operations were mentioned by 30 submitters. The main focus were human and/or commercial impacts on the environment, and the importance of protecting New Zealand’s waterways from degradation.

6.1.1 Concern for the environment

A number of submitters considered that commercial and industrial operations should not come before the protection of the environment:

 i do not have particular memories about this river... what i have a great concern at seeing our beautiful land continuously and relentlessly destroyed by us. NZ has a chance to stand out and to learn from the mistakes other older countries have done... but instead we seem to be following willingly the same path of destruction. Even if we do not care about the environment, NZ is a huge tourism attraction... will it stay so if it looses more pristine waters and areas? so many places are too polluted to swin in!!! come on!!! please work towards environmental sense rather than against.  I have paddled this fabulous river and was then seriously disappointed once we got near to town where human impact became evident. Please protect it's natural integrity from source to sea  The associated wildlife and nature is invaluable to the spiritual growth of young people, and is being lost and degraded all over this beautiful country. Do not let this opportunity pass us by.  Too many of New Zealand rivers are being polluted by agriculture, time to stop this cancer of our country!  All of NZ's rivers are 'special' the current use and abuse of all of them needs to be reviewed and greater acknowledgement given to their essential ecological functions and cultural roles  There are fewer and fewer of these sorts of environments not already compromised to fuel agriculture or farming  It sickens me to think the nature of the awa and surrounds may be degraded in short term pursuit for individual material gain. We must protect this outstanding river and I support the Water Conservation Order being made.  Rivers need to be protected from the money grabbing Dairy Investors .....we don't need another episode of water Bourne disease, like what happened in Havelock North ...the water table and aquifers need to be protected . ..  Rising population and increasing international and national commercial interests in our natural resources are putting pressure on our natural environment  Big farming and other private interests MUST take a back seat to the long term imperative of protecting these assets for ALL, not just a select few who wish to profit from them.  This generation has a moral and environmental duty to protect the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers. Far too many New Zealand rivers have been irriversably damaged by dams, irrrigation, overextraction, and pollution. I fully support the conservation order for both of them.  we must protect what is left of our supreme waterways and rectify the damage already inflicted by run off of nitrates and cattle farmed on the waters edge....be a part pf bringing back the old New Zealand quality of the natural world.  There are very few pristine rivers left in NZ and special measures need to be taken as soon as possible to protect rivers as this one from detrimental human activity  Protection of the planet is much more important than the livelihood and comfort of the people temporarily borrowing some space on it  It is also now very clear that the number of freshwater systems in NZ that have not been impacted by the expansion of intense farming is diminishing, and there is a national need to protect those that remain in a pristine state  Commercialisation has gone far enough in New Zealand. If we want to pride ourselves on being clean and green we need to concentrate on conservation.  Recently we have abdicated responsibility to farmers and land owners who have put financial gain above greater good of community and country. Care for fauna and flora is urgent!

 All wild rivers are special. I'm from the canterbury and understand the damage which can be inflicted through development if strict regulations aren't in place and enforced. Protect all the characteristics of this river system it's flows, the quality of its water, its physical margins now before irreparable damage is done. Learn from Canterburys mistakes.  With climate change, degradation, pollution and the exploitation of our natural resources for power and farming and other commercial practices we need to take stock of the few remaining untouched ecosystems and preserve these untouched environments on and into the future.  Life is not always about money. Investors on paper/ and or govt discussions say that they will protect the environment but in my opinion they never do and end up desecrating the environment and mining is a classic example of this. I have seen first hand mining companies that have totally ruined the beautiful West Coast of the South Island. I have spoken to West Coasters in Ross and some are very upset with the effects and destruction of mining. Enough is enough! No more exploitation of so called investors who only want to line their pockets and not care about the environment.  Please protect these special rivers. I know that economic prosperity of the region is important but not at the expense of our beautiful rivers.  New Zealand's rivers and surrounding habitats are too precious to be compromised by commercial interests and I fully support this water conservation order application to protect the Ngaruroro and Clive river  Our rivers are in danger of becoming the dirty and exhausted fatalities of hydro, development and farming. In reality rivers should be full of clean water and native fish. Protecting a river which is still in great condition should be a given.  The Ngaruroro is the only place I have seen a Gecko in the wild… this river will only ever become more valuable and must be protected at all costs , the environment is under enormous pressure and the days of raping natural resources are coming to an end  The ongoing subjugation of river and soul health in the name of industrial agriculture and horticulture is short-sighted, profit driven motive bereft of any strategic insight about preserving an in-tact, healthy, robust, functioning environment.  The Ngaruroro remains one of the iconic rivers of Hawkes Bay and given the recent controversy relating to the Regional Council and their support of unnecessary farming intensification it seems that the Hawkes Bay environment is under massive threat from commercial interests. We should not sell off our environment for short term gains. Sometimes it is not about money, it is about the future. This Order should be issued as soon as feasibly possible, or the river will lose that icon status  I question how our ancestors could have damaged the environment so easily - did they not see what they were doing? And yet here we are still ignoring Mother Earths need to care for all creatures - flora and fauna - in the name of human interests. Please stop the relentless devastation of our environment - leave our rivers for all including the animals so dependant on it to be enjoyed for future generations. We need leadership that is willing to protect our natural world not give it up for money.  Many of our special rivers have been polluted by dairying. We need the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers to stay in their original state to protect the endemic animal life that they sustain and protect. There is always going to be more demand for water as we have a growing population. Our pristine rivers and their wildlife shouldn’t pay the price for human expansionism.  Humans have a tendency to try to improve nature to find out later that they have destroyed the ecosystem for only minimal and shortsighted profits. Please leave the Ngaruroro untouched  If we don’t protect places like this we leave them vulnerable to human exploitation and degradation. We have fewer and fewer intact and unspoiled areas left.

Table 7 Submitters on issues relating to commercial and industrial operations. Name EPA Ref. No. Audrey Ashman 280 Beverly Barnes 30 Lorraine Barnes 145 Richard Bearne 283 Lindsay Britton 37 Brendan Cameron 40 Paul Carlyon 289 Jennifer Deans 297 Helena Duggan 180 Neil Hamilton 309 Murray Henderson 70 Susan Hickey 71 Mary Hutchinson 202 Bien Lampen-Smith 81 Shaun Lott 216 Marjan Lousberg 218 Kath McDonald 324 Paul Murney 99 Kilda Northcott 243 Raewyn Park 248 Gowan Robertson 337 Megan Rutherford 338 Anna Schimmel 260 Jeremy Smart 115 Michelle Trusttum 270 Paul Tudor 349 Vasiliki Vaiese 271 Janet Vaughan 129 Rene Vries 350 Tanja Wagner 131

6.2 Culture and Heritage Culture and Heritage was mentioned by 12 submitters. These submissions focused on Māori values and our responsibility to protect our heritage and sacred treasures (taonga).

 Everything we do has either a positive or negative impact that flows on, and we need to be very wise and protect our Papatuanuku for our generations to come.  Respect Papatuanuka.  I also support the application on the grounds that the Crown and agencies have an obligation to iwi or manawhenua to protect and enhance the environment which is a taonga under the Treaty of Waitangi. When the Crown adopted the governance role, it did so with the expressed responsibility to ensure the Māori right to matauranga could be fully exercised by iwi and all other rights and responsibilities that transferred to the government were advanced AS IF IWI had maintained their sovereign rights.  I grew up in the Hawkes Bay and as far away from the sea anyone in NZ can be. Rivers are an enduring part of my life and they are special taonga. Please protect them.  Nature is our precious heritage and each river is the resource for the native flora and fauna around and for us too. If you block Ngaruroro you destroy everything including us.  My father had an orchard on the Karamu Stream (which used to be part of the old Ngaruroro River) which he successfully balloted for in 1947 as a returned serviceman. It was once part of the Heretaunga block which was infamously acquired by the '12 Apostles'. The Heretaunga Plains were created by these and other rivers. They are a living example of these processes and as such are an excellent teaching resource for the people of the area. Maori used to cultivate kumara on their riverbanks.  I believe in the spirit of these rivers and upholding the values of the land.  Because this is sacred  I see them as taonga that we should guard and cherish for future generations.  It simply saddens me that we live in a culture now that is so disconnected from nature that we need to protect it with legislation, that most of what we want to do is exploit nature to make money. The quality of our lives, as well as the quality of nature, is degraded by this disconnection.  With the recent Tangata Whenua concept and legislation recognizing the Whanganui Awa and that of the Te Maru O Kaituna as living Taonga in my Toi Moana rohe, it is imperative that that the region of Te Matau a Maui has their un-modified braided awa, by modern activity, be protected along with the native flora and fauna that live within and around this Taonga. We cannot keep abusing our water sources we have taken for granted in the past. Thank you for the opportunity to express a view  It is essential we retain what braided river systems remain before we lose the lot- our unique Taonga live there.

Table 8 Submitters on issues relating to culture and heritage Name EPA Ref. No. Helena Duggan 180 Nancy Fulford 185 Al Green 307 Anna Beard 33 Sally Grimmett 308

Graham Lindsay 213 Pepijin Luiten 322 Robert Mohi 95 Lucy Treep 127 Susan Washington 356 Freda Woisin 364 Stroud Family 345

6.3 Water Quality Two submitters mentioned water quality in their submissions. Their focus was on the impact irrigation has on the exploitation of natural resources.

6.3.1 Irrigation  I am scandalised by the exploitation of water in the south island of our rivers and lakes for thre bottling and export of water and extraction for irrigation. We need to Listen to informed conservation opinion.  I lived in the south island and due to irrigation..water selling and farming have seen some amazing rivers destroyed for future generations....do not let this happen anywhere else..rivers should run free....look at the Waikato that starts as an amazi.g clean river and some parts so full of weeds

Table 9 Submitters on issues relating to water quality Submitter name EPA Ref. No. Ellen Donnelly 177 Elizabeth Tanner 268

6.4 River Conservation Conservation was mentioned by 65 submitters. Submissions focused on protecting the river (47 different submissions referenced protection) and preserving it for future generations (35 different submissions referenced preserving the river for future generations or their children).

6.4.1 Protection

 River need to protected.  Surely the retention of such unique natural habitats is of importance to us as a country?  Please can we protect those that remain! They are precious to us as New Zealanders. Regarding the Ngaruroro and Clive Rivers, these have a very special conservation status - well, at least, they should have. I understand they are one of the few remaining intact braided rives in the North Island.  ALL of our Hawkes bay rivers need protection!  Once we give it away we cannot take it back. Please preserve our land.

 WE NEED TO KEEP AREAS LIKE THIS PRISTINE SO WE CAN REMEMBER WHAT IT IS LIKE!  I believe that the rivers that remain as they have always been should stay that way and be protected from anything that could degrade them in any way.  I live in HB and would like to see this river preserved while there is a chance.  Too many of our natural river habitats have been destroyed or degraded. We need to protect the remaining rivers.  Growing numbers of NZers are becoming aware of the level and extent of environmental degradation in this beautiful country and want the damage to stop. We implore our decision- makers to show bold leadership in this area before its too late  I've spent years working in Asia. I've seen what happens to unprotected rivers. We have to wake up and realise that clean unpolluted water - without which we cannot survive - is a valuable and vital necessity. These two rivers are extra special and need respecting and protecting.  In these days of massive pollution everywhere it is vitally important to keep the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers as they are to protect the rivers and all the wildlife on and around them. We need to keep or increase our wildlife not decimate it further and good clean rivers help to do that  I have just traveled through Europe again after a gap of 35 years. I was constantly surprised at the protection afforded natural landscapes and farming communities by a multitude of counties. I didn't notice degradation despite the increase in population, unlike NZ. It is because they recognise the value in ecosystems and have in some places for 2000 years. NZ needs to wake up before it is too late. We are a young country and our natural resources are becoming degraded. The protection of our natural resources needs to mature and keep pace, like overseas, like Europe.  From the long term perspective we need to protect our water as it is a commodity in short supply in some countries now.  They should be heritage park places. They need protection for the future, not exploitation for the few.  Water and water quality is becoming more important worldwide due to growing pressure on natural water sources and degradation. One the quality has gone it is a long and expensive haul (if ever) to regain what has been lost. Nz is very fortunate to have a beautiful natural abundance of water but this is already depleted badly, what remains should be protected for the future.  Fresh water sources are taonga and must be protected- especially as the whole world begins to see their value. Clean fresh water is becoming rare - the new gold  I have lived in and around these rivers all my life and they are priceless. We need to make a stand and maintain these rivers no matter what.  Here in NZ we have so many natural treasures as yet unspoiled that I think that we have a wonderful opportunity to protect them & so keep this balance in place. This is why I am supporting keeping the Ngaruroro river as it is.  Our wild rivers are an important assets that should remain untouched  The rivers should be protected because the people and animals should be able to enjoy them safely  The rivers should be protected because the people and animals should be able to enjoy them safely  We should be protecting the unique landscapes that has made NZ so popular with tourists.  We should make a special effort to protect the rivers that are still in a good condition as they give life to many others.  Protection is key to sustaining the quality of the river in to the future!  We need to protect NZ from spoiling and marring

 Too many waterways are in trouble and some past saving without a massive input of revenue. The state of NZ's waterways concerns me greatly and saddens me. They should be protected because it is commonsense anything less is nonsensical.  We have destroyed far too any areas of natural beauty in NZ already. We must protect these spot as once gone they are gone for all time.  I would have thought that the pollution experience the Hastings & other water supply systems would have been the best indicator of all to indicate why all our water sources must be protected from human now.

6.4.2 Future Generations  These rivers must be preserved for the future. So little pristine habitat remains and we must think beyond this generation and think to the far future, preserving our when a for generations to come.  The Ngaruroro is very special to my family… I would like to be able to tell my children that we really have learned from our errors and are doing our best to restore it. Not that we have sacrifice[d ]decided the river to love of money.  As a parent, I believe we owe it to our younger generations to offer quality recreational environments and provide protection of pristine natural habitats for our native wildlife… I want my kids to have these opportunities and experiences too. Please protect these rivers  Our future generarions deserve to create the memories we have of nature and rivers such as the Ngaruroro.  Have have take many trips down the river whilst teaching… Areas and locations like need protecting for future generations so that it can continue to be use at a trip of a life time kayaking rafting fishing and adventuring in untouched nz bush/river.  I would like to see the outstanding values of the area retained and enhanced so that generations to come can enjoy what I have been able to enjoy.  We have made grave mistakes in the past by not acting to protect our waterways and now many of the places my family once enjoyed are not fit for swimming let alone consumption. For the sake of our children and theirs we must act to protect this important water way.  In order to ensure that future generations are able to enjoy this fantastic river we must give it the highest protection possible. It is of far more calue in its natural state than any “additions” we could make to or around it.  Stunning piece of the country and should remain unmolested The trout fishing in wilderness areas should be protected for my children and their children  There is no excuse for this generation permitting degradation of these precious resources.  Rivers like the Ngaruroro are special, a treasure that belongs to future generations of New Zealand kids and families to enjoy, as I used to enjoy growing up and swimming in  This is a beautiful swimmable river that needs to be preserved for the future generations of people and natural river inhabitants.  Please consider the immeasurable value of such nature assets, for future generations & grant it the protection it deserves & needs.  Keep it for this and future generations.  The upper reaches of the Ngaruroro river have long been a favourite recreation area for me and my family and a haven for native species . It needs to be cherished for future generations of New Zealanders  We took our children camping beside pure clear rivers. They remember those experiences. They want their children to be able to experience the same but are reluctant to allow them to swim in many rivers at this point of time because of pollution build up.

 Our heritage needs preserving for our offspring. We owe it to them to keep waterways clean and natural.  I feel it is my responsibility to protect these rivers for future generations to connect with. These rivers that we are deeply connected too as part of the planet/earth/our home, are not ours exploit, they belong to no one but are intrinsically part of us, we must leave them for next generations to relate with and connect to, so they maybe able to realize that they are not separate from the rivers. To know of our connections to the planet and waters (rivers and oceans) is to know ourselves as we truly are.  Without our efforts to protect our outstanding natural environments our ability to live well into the future is doomed. Get with the programme, New Zealand. Extra efforts must be put in place NOW for the well being of the human race  Why do you think these rivers are ours to plunder? We should be safeguarding them for our children’s children  I would love to see a higher standard of environmental protection for these two local rivers. I want everyone to be able to enjoy them, including future generations.  It is pertinent that we protect any remaining outstanding natural assets, such as the Ngaruroro River, for future generations We need our wildlife and special areas tourism is our future. We need to build clean green  much could be done to protect these rivers for future generations and for the wildlife that we don’t want to lose.  I want my children to experience these rivers in the way I did.  I had the privilege of growing up when NZ was relatively unpolluted and unspoiled and believe we have a duty to protect environmental assets such as these for future generations.  By 2018 most of New Zealand’s once-pristine river ways are a disgrace to those of us who have a burden of care for them – our generation. We have failed to protect and to pass on a real legacy to the generations coming after us. It is therefore critical, that those few remaining rivers, as yet undefiled, can remain in such state through our efforts to protect them in perpetuity. We presently have this opportunity and must not waste it.  The Ngaruroro river is the last remaining pristine river in Hawke’s Bay. We need to save it so future grandfathers can tell their grandchildren that it is still safe!  I realise times were somewhat simpler then, but I see no reason why today’s generations cannot be directed to guard this wonderful resource with more care than is currently evident.  the environment is under enormous pressure and the days of raping natural resources are coming to an end , the younger generations are becoming increasingly aware that they will wear the fallout from unethical practices  I lived in the south island and due to irrigation..water selling and farming have seen some amazing rivers destroyed for future generations....do not let this happen anywhere else  I want my children to experience swimming in rivers like I did as a kid. The Tukituki is very poor water quality let’s try and save he rest o the rivers in Hawke’s bay  I grew up beside these rivers, swimming in them and exploring the river banks as a child. I see them as taonga that we should guard and cherish for future generations.  My children will inherit the legacy we leave them as custodians of this land and we are therefore responsible to give it to them as nature intended… Please stop the relentless devastation of our environment – leave our rivers for all including the animals so dependant on it to be enjoyed for future generations. We need leadership that is willing to protect our natural world not give it up for money.  I would love my grandchildren to be able to swim in the Ngaruroro.  I support this application because I believe it is important to preserve our beautiful places that are our children and grand children’s heritage.

6.4.3 Other  Nature has elegant, intelligent designs – way beyond our understanding. (Eg: when wolves were reintroduced to a national park and the unforeseen impact that this had). Leave Nature alone – let her create without interruption or intervention by us humans. Let us marvel and be intrigued. We may see in a new way.

Table 10 Submitters on issues relating to river conservation Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Jacob Butler 287 Brendan Cameron 40 Peter Beaver 152 Tony Connolly 48 Ann Cook 292 Sharon Cope 293 Bernadette Cornille 167 Shauna Costello 50 Josie Coultard 168 Mary Coupe 52 Trace Custer 295 Sam Dearlove 174 Clint deckard 298 Peggy Fittes 63 Nancy Fulford 185 Julie Gardiner 187 Shannon Gilmore 190 Glenn Good 304 Neil Hamilton 309 Murray Henderson 70 Richard Honiss 201 Fiona James 317 Liana Kelly 319 Wright Liam 212 P D R Lindsay-Salmon 214 Kathleen Logan 215 John Lovell 220

Kerry Lowry 82 Kay Lyall 83 Josephine Mahar 86 Alison martin 323 Moire Mathieson 225 Kath McDonald 324 Mandy McMullin 232 Kate Moriarty 96 Fiona Morris 238 John Newson 104 Kilda Northcott 243 Mary O’Connnell 244 Abby Owsley 247 Jessie Rawnsley 255 Kaye Reardon 335 Patricia Reddy 256 Gowan Robertson 337 Megan Rutherford 338 Sarah-Jane Saravani 258 Christopher Simmons 261 Julie Simpson 263 Jeremy Smart 115 Darrin Smith 340 Anna Solano 117 Carolyn Sparks 265 Rita Steel 118 Diana Stein 342 William Stringer 267 Gillian Stringer 344 Elizabeth Tanner 268 Abbie Taylor 269 Lynette Taylor 345 Lucy Treep 127 Vasiliki Vaiese 271

Brendan Veale 272 Catherine Vile 130 Marie-Louise Ward 355 Tony Winter 363

6.5 Water Sports Water sports was mentioned by 13 submitters. Kayaking (mentioned four times), swimming (mentioned nine times), and rafting (mentioned three times) where the main focus.

 As a whitewater kayaker, this catchment is super important to our sport. It provides a pristine outdoors experience and is often paddled as a two day trip that removes you from civilisation. This needs to be protected  I have greatly appreciated kayaking and swimming in many beautiful fresh nz rivers and feel extremely lucky to have seen healthy birdlife and fish along the way  Areas and locations like need protecting for future generations so that it can continue to be use at a trip of a life time kayaking rafting fishing and adventuring in untouched nz bush/river.  I kayaked a lot on both the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers and both rivers are unique and need our protection so that they can be preserved for current and future generations. Ko te awa ko au'  I have had been rafting the upper Ngarurro for quite a few years. The section from Kuripapango down to Whatawhata is especially unique in that it provides an overnight wilderness experience that is road accessible. Helicopters are generally required for trips of this nature.The scenery is both beautiful and spectacular, while the river is interesting with many Grade 2 & 3 rapids. Because of the high quality of this experience, I support the WCO.  I spent a family holiday on the banks of the Ngaruroro - camping, swimming and walking  We have made grave mistakes in the past by not acting to protect our waterways and now many of the places my family once enjoyed are not fit for swimming let alone consumption.  Rivers like the Ngaruroro are special, a treasure that belongs to future generations of New Zealand kids and families to enjoy, as I used to enjoy growing up and swimming in.  Memories.....brought up my children here and the rivers were wonderful for swimming, fun and fishing.  My partner and I have our favourite swimming spot in the Ngaruroro river. It's beautiful, and peaceful, and to me the water still seems clean enough to swim in, unlike our other HB rivers. I would love to still be able to swim there during hot summer days, years from now. We used to swim in the Tukituki river when I was a child, but it feels too polluted to do that anymore.  Swimming and spending time at local rivers is an true-blue kiwi activity that I can share with friend and family.  I want my children to experience swimming in rivers like I did as a kid. The Tukituki is very poor water quality let’s try and save he rest o the rivers in Hawke’s bay  I grew up beside these rivers, swimming in them and exploring the river banks as a child. I see them as taonga that we should guard and cherish for future generations.

Table 11 Submitters on issues relating to water sports Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Ray Beentjes 153 Josie Coultard 168 Sam Dearlove 174 Frank Dohmen 176 Brain Megaw 326 Caitlin Carew 44 Nancy Fulford 185 Murray Henderson 70 Josephine Mahar 86 Kathrine Purchas 334 Jessie Rawnsley 255 Abbie Taylor 269 Lucy Treep 127

6.6 Fishing Fishing was mentioned by seven submissions. Of these the majority advocate preserving the fishery that they have enjoyed in the past.

 Absolutely incredible trout fishery! To beautiful to be ruined ...  I spent some of my best holidays fly fishing the Ngarururu and it’s tributaries.  I would like to know that the fish in our rivers are thriving and edible.  While now resident in marlborough now I had extensive experience of the Ngauroro when based n Hawkes Bay in the 1960s and 1970s. The Ngauroro and its tributaries such as the Ohara and Taruarau I visited on numerous occasions particularly trout fishing. This is a magnificent pristine watershed and steeped in much history. I fully support a WCO to protect its important public outdoor values.  I grew up in Hastings and often tramped and fished these rivers both near the source and downstream.  Stunning piece of the country and should remain unmolested The trout fishing in wilderness areas should be protected for my children and their children  Having fished & tramped in and around the Ngaruroro river as a teenager I have affinity for the awa and a wish to be able to take my own children (and theirs!) into an area that is pristine and lifeblood to all that rely on it

Table 12 Submitters on issues relating to fishing Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Oliver Bassett 150 Arnie Buckmann 157 Moire Mathieson 225 Tony Orman 246 William Powell 253 Glenn Good 304 Paul Carlyon 289

6.7 Water Quality Issues affecting water quality were mentioned by eight submitters. Submitters addressed the rivers’ ‘natural state’ and the need to preserve our ‘pristine’ rivers against ‘degradation’.

 Lower flows in summer warm water up thereby increasing growth of algal blooms.  [A}t a time when Aotearoa’s rivers are so degraded, we should be looking to keep our rivers safe, and improve water quality, not add to the list of rivers that are struggling  I have witnessed the rapid intensification of farming practices in Canterbury and the subsequent loss of water quality and values in the local rivers. We must prevent any more degredation of our rivers in New Zealand. Please support this application to protect the Ngaruroro River. People in the future will acknowledge and thank you for your vision...  In the upper reaches the river is pristine, and throughout the entire length of the river, the water quality is very high.  My grandfather, Wilfred Simmons, was born in Napier and lived and worked all his early life as a shepherd on various farms on the East Coast, especially Waipiro Bay. He regaled me as a child with tales of his experiences moving flocks of sheep all over Hawke's Bay. He said he drank from every river and stream without a thought for whether the water was safe to drink. Even by 1970 many of these rivers were no longer safe  I am well aware of this river from my early days living in Hastings. It was relatively untouched and clean. I don't want it to deteriorate like most other rivers in NZ are.  These rivers are ecologically important, providing habitat for a range of threatened species and have an intrinsic value with so few rivers remaining in New Zealand in a pristine natural state.  In order to ensure that future generations are able to enjoy this fantastic river we must give it the highest protection possible. It is of far more calue in its natural state than any “additions” we could make to or around it.

Table 13 Submitters on issues relating to water quality Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Fran Bell 154 Johanna Bloomberg 34 Daniel Bristow 285

Bruce Philpott 250 Christopher Simmons 261 Kelvin Walls 133 Tanya Cook 49 Shannon Gilmore 190

6.8 Ecology Ecological topics were mentioned by 66 submissions. Submitters listed ecosystems, habitats, natural, and braided rivers as important features we must protect.

 These two rivers being unique braided rivers need even greater acknowledgement as taonga, it is tragic that they even need special protection but if that is required then it must be given!  the rivers in new zealand should be protected as they house entire eco systems which play a part in our countries whole environment. without our rivers many species would die out.  They also provide habitat for rare native species. We have lost too much of our natural wildlife and natural systems. We need to protect what is left. That is the right thing to do.  We don’t have many untouched braided rivers left in Aotearoa, therefore it is important we protect the few we have left  These rivers are ecologically important, providing habitat for a range of threatened species and have an intrinsic value with so few rivers remaining in New Zealand in a pristine natural state.  It is also good for the ecosystem. Please preserve it.  Rivers are important to our native birds and wildlife and also a major factor in the natural beauty of New Zealand which tourists from around the world come to see. They should be protected  I think it is fast becoming obvious that our waterways need serious protection and conservation for the benefit of wildlife, the wider ecosystems and humankind.  I have been concerned about our rivers for some time; their declining health; threats to native species like tuna and so it is important to protect those rivers that are still pristine like the Ngaruroro and Clive.  Braided rivers are a unique and highly valuable ecosystem.  I can't see why we should be pleading for any river and its precious habitat. Raided Rivers have special wild life. As Braided Rivers are destroyed we kill all the special ecology  These are the last examples in the South Island of these precious habitats for NZ native wildlife.  These areas are extremely unique and need more protection so they retain their highly regarded environmental qualities. They also need to have enhanced protection, and a focus on improving their naturalness. Habitat for species and clean, clear rivers, flourishing with native plants and animals should be a priority for NZers everywhere.  I have been a member of the Ornithological Society of NZ all my adult life, and have noted many accounts of the importance of this river to local populations of bird species dependant on clean waters.  We learned so much about the signicance of braided river ecology when we campaigned to save the Wairau River, a SI braided river. We can not afford to loose the fauna and flora supported by braided river hydrology

 These braided rivers provide outstanding habitats for many native / indigenous species (of plant, insect, bird, reptile ... ). Their value is very great - and is hard to quantify, as their value to us, and all who live in New Zealand, is many-faceted. Once degraded, these eco-systems take years to recover, if at all. These two rivers are highly important as they are in a good state at the moment. It is responsible of us, the only responsible way forward, to look after them for ourselves and for our next generations.  Please consider protecting the Ngaruroro river to maintain & improve this rare, pristine habitat & it’s ecology.  Braided river systems support rare ecosystems, and need to be protected from that standpoint alone.  Our beautiful braided rivers, with all their wildlife, are going to be a thing of the past if we do not fully protect them.  I grew up with Braided rivers....they have a different presence than those with banks or cliffs & gorge rivers - easy to dismiss as gravel (seen as bare stones and harvested for filler in building roads). The mid-Canterbury experience tells me that the under-ground flow is more important as "water table" and we were told we were "only ever 10 days from drought". The water-table was hugely important as we had a well, however now people are removed - from the clarity of water being an important secret underground system, and as an endangered habitat for the birds, fish & invertebrates living in the fragile riverbed system. We don't observe the modest, h umble nesting sites, or appreciate just how important the whole braided river is...it has its own character, it blends the territory into the history of our land.  These braided rivers are an important ecosystem to protect that maintain the health of all that is around them, including people.  Once species are gone, they are gone forever. These rivers are home to threatened species and beautiful wildlife and should be protected!  Maintaining healthy flow rates are essential in sustaining the native aquatic fauna, something that I am passionate about.  The Ngaruroro River is one of the very few rivers in the North Island with a braided system that remains intact.... The entire river, including the Clive River, provides rare and important habitat for native birds and fish. It is essential to protect it because if it gets damaged it would a tragic loss.  These special and unique ecosystems must be protected. This river and the animals who’ve call it home are treasures for all New Zealanders to protect and enjoy  The only unspoiled braided river in the North Island. Such rivers are particularly important for birds that nest on the shoals which are protected by the river braids. These habitats have been greatly reduced over the decades to the great detriment of birds such as banded dotterel and black fronted tern.  Also did much ornithology-mainly raptors and studies on L/tailed bats in associated bush areas, These iconic water courses must be protected from further developement.  Young New Zealanders face an extremely uncertain and precarious future, especially when it comes to access to clean safe freshwater and the support of functioning ecosystems (and their associated ecosystem services). This WCO would be added protection for an important river at a time when industry seeks more and more to control common resources. We need to support and protect the public interest as access to water and healthy ecosystems is being dangerously eroded away.  As an adult I've enjoyed watching the bird life around both the Ngaruroro and Clive rivers - we have so many endangered birds and native fish it would be wonderful for them to have a safe, clean environment to thrive. For some reason many people seem to treat rivers like they are drains, or conveyor belts t o take away their waste. I see rivers more like arteries - the whole ecosystem is only as healthy as the rivers that support it. We need to do everything we can to

protect and nurture these special places, that's why I support a Water Conservation Order for the Ngaruroro and Clive Rivers  I am most concerned about the breeding grounds of birds, , especially on the braided rivers and about keeping our waterways healthy.  The rivers and surrounding land need to be protected. Native birds and trees utilise those waterway. Insects flourish and therefore we have extremely unique and isolated areas of beauty in New Zealand. As this wildlife can’t talk I ask you tribunal to consider these silent victims and please do not destroy their homes, their water, their life. I have a responsibility to this wildlife to please ask that you consider them, the voiceless. Thank you.  We should be protecting whats left of native untouched new zealand. It was here long before we were all out native species occupy places like this. What gives us the right to push native species out of there home?  The Ngaruroro is the only place I have seen a Gecko in the wild , its ecological importance is far greater than any farmers need for wealth  As a country we should look to the long term and keep NZ as clean as possible without degrading our natural habitats. It the most valuable asset we have  We should be protecting the unique landscapes… as well as protecting the habitat for flora and fauna.  I think we should do all we can to protect our nature. These rivers are a habitat for many native species that can't be found in more polluted rivers around the country.  Our braided rivers have evolved as a special ecological feature in parts of NZ. That evolution speaks to a complex and dynamic relationship with the land, air and sea - the entire surrounding eco system.  The endangered blue duck inhabits the river.  Our native Whio who live in these rivers, such a special duck, having seen these in the wild co-parenting and rearing their young chicks, they are dedicated to protecting their young. Dedication to protection is something that we should learn from and protect them as they would their young and the rivers they live in. Please protect the Whio’s for the future as well as the rest of the ecosystem in the rivers -native plants, aquatic life, birds etc.  This habitat is unique and valuable - don’t let it be lost. Once it has gone it is impossible to reinstate  Rivers are vital ecosystems in their own right and support abundant biodiversity. Humans cannot and will not be healthy if we don't keep our natural environments intact and clean.  Braided rivers are rare and must be protected to conserve all flora and fauna dependent on this declining ecosystem.  Having spent time around the Ngaruroro River to keep the superb natural headwaters and ecosystem associated with it requires protection.  I have just traveled through Europe again after a gap of 35 years. I was constantly surprised at the protection afforded natural landscapes and farming communities by a multitude of counties. I didn't notice degradation despite the increase in population, unlike NZ. It is because they recognise the value in ecosystems and have in some places for 2000 years.  With climate change, degradation, pollution and the exploitation of our natural resources for power and farming and other commercial practices we need to take stock of the few remaining untouched ecosystems and preserve these untouched environments on and into the future. Therefore protecting our native wildlife, flora and fauna and life giving river systems.  Humans have a tendency to try to improve nature to find out later that they have destroyed the ecosystem for only minimal and short sighted profits.

Table 14: Submitters on issues relating to ecology Submitter name EPA Ref. No. Lindsey Britton 37 Leanne Campbell 288 Peter Beaver 152 Barry Christiansen 47 Tanya Cook 49 Bernadette Cornille 167 Jarrod Crossland 56 Maureen Dewar 299 Sue Fitchett 183 Shannon Gilmore 190 Faye Goggin 191 Rebecca Goodyear 305 Chris Grose 196 Jill Hamel 197 Andrew John 76 Serena Jones 204 Wright Liam 212 Shaun Lott 216 Marjan Lousberg 218 Alison Martin 323 Amy McComb 88 Terre Nicholson 329 Graham Palmer 108 Bruce Philpott 250 Cathrine Pollock 251 Gillian Pollock 252 William Powell 253 Marnie Prickett 333 Kathrine Purchas 334 Patricia Seyb 249 Milika Shilton 114 Christopher Simmons 261

Jeremy Smart 115 Nikki Smith 341 Rita Steel 118 Diana Stein 342 Michelle Trusttum 270 Brendan Veale 272 Melissa Ward 354 Sandy Wild 359 Christine B. 281 Michelle Boulle 35 Jared Grey 195 Kay Lyall 83 Kilda Northcott 243 Mellissa Ward 354

6.9 Other Recreation Other recreation activities were mentioned by 33 submitters, these topics included: camping, tramping, and tourism.

 I spent a family holiday on the banks of the Ngaruroro – camping, swimming and walking. It’s an incredibly special river and deserves to be recognised and protected along its entire length.  Having fished & tramped in and around the Ngaruroro river as a teenager I have affinity for the awa and a wish to be able to take my own children (and theirs!) into an area that is pristine and lifeblood to all that rely on it.  These rivers also have extremely high recreational value.  The Ngaruroro is very special to my family. We camp and swim in it high in the ranges.  I have spent a number of nights camping in and around the river and treasure the memories of this beautiful area.  I have paddled and tramped the Ngaruroro headwaters since the late 1970’s. I have just invested in a pack raft to allow me to to experience the river more often. Sullying, manipulating and polluting these arteries of our country must stop for the health of all. I refresh my spirit in her headwaters, please let her be.  I main experience on the Ngaruroro River is the good fortune to be able to jet boat on it. It also provides sanctuary for wild life. It is a fairly unique river in this part of the country  I spent several holidays with relations at various areas around Hawkes Bay often using the rivers for activities. This is a beautiful swimmable river that needs to be preserved for the future generations of people and natural river inhabitants.  There are so few pristine places left in New Zealand. Valuing them and preserving them will have huge economic benefits in future from wilderness tourism and nature watchers. This sector will become a greater part of global GDP as such places and species become rarer, and rich tourists seek genuine wilderness experiences

 Memories.....brought up my children here and the rivers were wonderful for swimming, fun and fishing. I have returned and was shocked to read what is happening. Please preserve the Ngaruroro and others.  Myself and my children swam in this river during the 1990’s and we would like to keep it beautiful for my grandchildren. It was the best and cleanest river to swim in Hawkes Bay and the upper reaches of the Ngaruroro are very beautiful.  My partner and I have our favourite swimming spot in the Ngaruroro river. It’s beautiful, and peaceful, and to me the water still seems clean enough to swim in, unlike our other HB rivers. I would love to still be able to swim there during hot summer days, years from now. We used to swim in the Tukituki river when I was a child, but it feels too polluted to do that anymore  Swimming and spending time at local rivers is an true-blue kiwi activity that I can share with friend and family. Over my lifetime I have seen the deterioration of rivers, to the point that I question the risk I am taking by spending time in or around the water.  As a child we swam in the HB rivers. I am saddened to see the state they are in now.  I am a long time tramper in Canterbury and the Kaimanawas and have been very concerned about the braided rivers and the spread of dairying in the Canterbury Plains which I considered completely unsuited to dairying, likewise Hawkes Bay.  As a child, growing up in Hastings, the Ngaruroro River was both a playground and a learning ground. We floated along the river on Lilo’s (and if you’re old enough, you’ll know what that is). We biked out there on hot summer days, to gather with friends. We peered under rocks to see the life beneath, guided by our teacher. We took jars of the river’s clear water, back to the classroom, to observe the tiny creatures that made the river their home.  Unlike those few who support the destruction of the Ngaruroro I have hunted its length and breadth and seen its beauty and place a different value on it , a value money can’t compensate for.  It is also very popular with fishermen, and is used for many other recreational activities.  I have spent many happy times in Hawkes Bay and in recent years have cycled many 31ilometres by these rivers.  We took our children camping beside pure clear rivers. They remember those experiences. They want their children to be able to experience the same but are reluctant to allow them to swim in many rivers at this point of time because of pollution build up. I would like to know that the fish in our rivers are thriving and edible. New Zealand must keep its “Clean, Green” image honestly ( not just as a surface image).  I grew up in Hastings and often tramped and fished these rivers both near the source and downstream.  Even if we do not care about the environment, NZ is a huge tourism attraction... will it stay so if it looses more pristine waters and areas?  We need our wildlife and special areas tourism is our future. We need to build clean green

Table 15 Submitters on issues relating to other recreation Submitter name EPA Ref. No. Caitlin Carew 44 Paul Carlyon 289 Tanya Cook 49 Shauna Costello 50 Clint Deckard 298

Shaun Gilbert 67 Jennifer Hartley 69 Richard Honiss 201 Kathleen Logan 215 Josephine Mahar 86 Joy Mintorn 234 Kathrine Purchas 334 Jessie Rawnsley 255 Patricia Reddy 256 Patricia Seyb 249 Julie Simpson 263 Jeremy Smart 115 Brendan Veale 272 Catherine Vile 130 Moire Mathieson 225 William Powell 253 Audrey Ashman 280 Kaye Reardon 335

6.10 Natural Characteristics and Amenity Natural characteristics and amenity were mentioned by 16 submitters. Submitters have used the following descriptive words: beautiful, pristine, scenic, outstanding, and landscape. Its uniqueness as a braided river was mentioned as well.

 Braided rivers are rare and must be protected to conserve all flora and fauna dependent on this declining ecosystem.  The rivers are an incredibly special and peaceful place that represent so much that is good about the region. We should be preserving and protecting the natural wonders of our environment and not constantly trying to find ways to exploit and destroy them.  I have spent many wonderful days and hours in this unique place and enjoy and appreciate the diversity of wildlife in this habitat. We. Any afford to lose any more niches like this  Having spent time around the Ngaruroro River to keep the superb natural headwaters and ecosystem associated with it requires protection.  All existing waterways in NZ need to be kept in situ and only enhancements to existing waterways should be made....for example planting foliage where and when practicable and appropriate  Braided rivers are only found in a few places on the entire planet. We have one in the north island. We’re very lucky. Let’s keep it!  Beautiful river would be a shame to see it go the way of other Hawke’s bay rivers!  They are places of great beauty and wondrous bird life.

 It is pertinent that we protect any remaining outstanding natural assets, such as the Ngaruroro River, for future generations. Absolutely incredible trout fishery! To beautiful to be ruined ...  I strongly support the preservation of quality river environments such as the Ngaruroro and Clive Rivers. As a parent, I believe we owe it to our younger generations to offer quality recreational environments and provide protection of pristine natural habitats for our native wildlife.  I have spent a number of nights camping in and around the river and treasure the memories of this beautiful area. I would like to see the outstanding values of the area retained and enhanced so that generations to come can enjoy what I have been able to enjoy.  This is a beautiful swimmable river that needs to be preserved for the future generations of people and natural river inhabitants.  Our beautiful braided rivers, with all their wildlife, are going to be a thing of the past if we do not fully protect them.  It is pertinent that we protect any remaining outstanding natural assets, such as the Ngaruroro River, for future generations I have had been rafting the upper Ngarurro for quite a few years.  It was the best and cleanest river to swim in Hawkes Bay and the upper reaches of the Ngaruroro are very beautiful.  It’s beautiful, and peaceful, and to me the water still seems clean enough to swim in, unlike our other HB rivers.  These two rivers being unique braided rivers need even greater acknowledgement as taonga, it is tragic that they even need special protection but if that is required then it must be given!  We don’t have many untouched braided rivers left in Aotearoa, therefore it is important we protect the few we have lef  Braided rivers are a unique and highly valuable ecosystem  Raided Rivers have special wild life. As Braided Rivers are destroyed we kill all the special ecology  We learned so much about the signicance of braided river ecology when we campaigned to save the Wairau River, a SI braided river. We can not afford to loose the fauna and flora supported by braided river hydrology  These braided rivers provide outstanding habitats for many native / indigenous species (of plant, insect, bird, reptile ... ). Their value is very great - and is hard to quantify, as their value to us, and all who live in New Zealand, is many-faceted.  Braided river systems support rare ecosystems, and need to be protected from that standpoint alone… there is a national need to protect those that remain in a pristine state  We don't observe the modest, h umble nesting sites, or appreciate just how important the whole braided river is...it has its own character, it blends the territory into the history of our land. In the south island, the rivers were crossed using mokihi, temporary raupo canoes, that skipped and tumbled down the rivers in turbulence and in the dry, carried on shoulders between streams. For horses, we traipsed across wide braided rivers in awe of the landscape and with a sense of timelessness....these rivers grounded you in the vast land of time and place. They should be heritage park places.  These braided rivers are an important ecosystem to protect that maintain the health of all that is around them, including people.  The only unspoiled braided river in the North Island.  Our braided rivers have evolved as a special ecological feature in parts of NZ.  The awe and majestive nature of this river is stunning and the loss of it would be devastating. My children will inherit the legacy we leave them as custodians of this land and we are therefore responsible to give it to them as nature intended. How will we look back in 10 years when we have wiped all braided rivers from NZ - for so little in return?

 It is essential we retain what braided river systems remain before we lose the lot- our unique Taonga live there.

Table 16 Submitters on issues relating to natural characteristics and amenity Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Michelle Boulle 35 Debra Chalmers 290 Phil Etheridge 300 Jared Gray 128 Alice Hicks 199 Irene Minhinnick 94 Samuel Moss 98 Catherine Vile 130 Oliver Bassett 150 Julie Coultard 168 Clint Deckard 298 Richard Honiss 201 Marjan Lousberg 218 Brian Megaw 326 Joy Mintorn 234 Kathrine Purchas 334 Lindsey Britton 37 Barry Christiansen 47 Shannon Gilmore 190 Faye Goggins 191 Andrew John 76 Serena Jones 204 Shuan Lott 216 Alison Martin 323 Amy McComb 88 Gillian Pollock 252 Michelle Trusttum 270 Vasiliki Vaiese 271 Stroud family 121

7. Other Submitters

The remaining 20 submitters did not use the Forest and Bird web page to submit. The topics raised in these submissions are discussed below.

The discussions provided below are not intended to provide a comprehensive account of all topics, aspects, concerns or requests raised in submissions, but rather to provide an overview of the range of views of submitters on this application.

7.1 Commercial and Industrial Operations and Consequential Impacts Nine of the submitters addressed commercial and industrial operations. The submitters focused on S207 (b) of the RMA and the potential negative impacts on businesses, now and into the future, if the proposed WCO was implemented.

7.1.1 Adverse Impacts on Commercial and Industrial Operations  The Order should allow the preserving of existing consents and the renewal of existing consents…To do otherwise would create an economic disaster for the area creating a significant loss of jobs, a significant loss of productive orchard land that supplies NZ with fruit and other crops, plus will destroy a significant part of the export crop, and NZ needs to preserve export related earnings. The consequences of a blanket ban on water use far outweighs the net benefit of the river protection, noting the applicants are predominantly tourism business and recreational based. The hydraulic feed areas of groundwater should be excluded from the Order for reasons given above.  The scheme provides flood control and drainage benefits for approximately 39,000 ha of premium land for horticulture and viticulture. along with protection for approximately 127,000 people.  Pursuant to Section 207(b), the board as a special tribunal is required to have regard to the needs of primary and secondary industry and the community. Tumu is significant to the primary and secondary industries of the Hawke’s Bay. It is also a consent holder and uses water from the Heretaunga Plains aquifer in its daily business. The primary industry within the Hawke’s bay depends on quality supply of fresh water. Crops and trees require irrigation in order to be able to survive summer dry conditions. The economic viability of both the primary sector and related secondary industry depend on sustainable primary production to remain viable and retain livelihoods, not just for land owners but for the thousands of workers they employ.  In relation to the needs of primary industry under Section 207 of the RMA, the WCO proposal still does not discuss what these needs are, but rather continues to focus mainly on the proposed restrictions instead. Federated Farmers remain concerned that suggested standards in the WCO are inappropriate to considering the needs of primary industry producers and users of the water resource.  Not enough wight given to primary & secondary industry sector  I am happy to support the application in respect of the upper reaches of the river as the impact will be minor but not over the lower reach of the river as there are already many commercial users of the water both in the river and in the associated aquifers. The commercial impact

could be significant if resource consent holders have their water take reduced in the future once existing consents expire and they would certainly seek compensation.  As an existing water consent holder in the proposed WCO catchment we strongly oppose the WCO, as it will have adverse economic effect on my family’s current business and livelihood. As well as the wider negative affect on the Hawkes Bay economy and community. Reference 207 (b) of the RMA.  It is my understanding that the minimum flow levels required by the WCO are somewhat higher than the minimum water flows often experienced in a normal dry Hawkes Bay summer. This would exacerbate the operational risk to horticulture, agriculture and viticulture concerns who rely on water for production, as water supplies could be cut off when minimum flow levels are reached. These businesses may suffer hardship through loss of income derived from reduction in annual yield and, in worst case scenarios, complete loss of crops, vine or tree stocks.

7.1.2 Consequential Social Impacts  The effect on secondary industries, of which Tumu is just one example, and the people that they employ is considerable. For Tumu, over 100 people employed means over 100 people earning wages for families children and communities.

Table 17 Submitters on issues relating to commercial and industrial operations Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Lawn Cottages (Craig Alexander) 17 Page Bloomer Properties Ltd (Daniel Bloomer) 351 Tumu Timbers Ltd (Matthew Lawson) 360 Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Peter Matich) 347 Munt Erin Whyte (Alexander Couper Whyte) 148 Matthew Falliow Edwards 149 Rowan Kent & Tracy Kent (both submissions used the same text) 19 & 20 Jackie Kryzewski 0146

7.2 Alternative Processes for catchment management

7.2.1 TANK

The Hawke’s Bay Regional Council initiated its TANK Plan Change process for resolving water management issues in the Tutaekuri, Ahuriri, Ngaruroro and Karamu/Clive catchments in 2012. The ‘TANK project’ refers to a community based collaborative process to consider the management requirements for these rivers and their connected surface and groundwater.

Nine submitters mentioned the TANK process, with the majority in favour of the TANK process. Submitters focused on the collaborative TANK process, National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management, and the Regional Council.

 Substantial investment has been made in the Heretaunga Plains on the basis of access to water. Current management practices enable the river resources to be managed sustainably through the regional council. this includes the development of good management practices through the TANK process.  We feel that the whole matter should be left to the Regional Council and the people affected on the Heretaunga Plains to work through any problems with water availability through the TANK process. Once a Water Conservation Order is approved there is no way to going back if we find it is not working for ALL. As to the application on the Clive River we are neutral.  The Regional Council are doing a great job & they should remain doing so. They have enough resource, power & information to keep this specified area in best state for all, not just the applicants on this WCO.  A recommendation should also be made by the Special Tribunal that the development of the policy and rule framework for both rivers continue through the existing collaborative community process (the TANK group) under the Freshwater Management National Policy Statement (FMNPS) 2017.  This application renders nugatory the TANK process and the collaborative approach to developing changes to the Regional Resource Management plan including changes implementing the policies of the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management 2014.  Federated Farmers support this collaborative community-based type of plan preparation process as a more appropriate form of resource management planning (especially where environmental outcomes are linked to the actions of many stakeholders within the community). The TANK planning process has involved many meetings and workshops with these stakeholder groups over many months. In this regard, the interests of plan stakeholders, many of whom are from the local community, have been, and continue to be, carefully considered and taken into account as part of development of a practical resource management plan.  The HBRC should be given the opportunity to complete the TANK study and then manage the river systems involved to the benefit of all users. Imposing an Order on the lower reach of the Ngaruroro River could severely impede this process and result in worse outcomes than would otherwise be the case.  To this effect Hawkes Bay Regional Council is collaborating with a wide range of other stakeholders and affected parties through the TANK initiative and has been steadily working towards the delivery of a sustainable regional water management strategy. It is my personal opinion that the imposition of this WCO will detrimentally affect the outcomes and objectives that could potentially be achieved by TANK and that, given time, TANK will not only achieve a similar outcome in relation to preservation of waterway habitats, birds, fish, flora and fauna but will facilitate this in a manner that is not detrimental to rural industry and regional economic wellbeing.  Te Taiao Hawkes Bay Environment Forum wishes to reiterate its support for a WCO for the whole of the Ngaruroro River. Our continuing involvement in the TANK process in the past 12 months since our initial submission in August 2017 has further reinforced the importance of a ‘mountains to the sea’ approach which in our view recognises the ecological significance of both the upper and lower sections of the Ngaruroro

7.2.2 Catchment management and planning Four submitters mentioned that the WCO failed to address catchment management.

 Section 9 Schedule 2 protects the mainstem of the Ngaruroro river from the Whanawhana cable way to the coastal margin Section 6 & Schedule 3 protects the tributaries of the Ngaruroro river and hydraulically connected ground water for its contribution to native fish

habitat, habitat for avifauna, jetboating amenity and recreation. In applying the same standards as the upper reaches, the WCO application denies land users the opportunity to create water storage on any of the tributaries of the river, even in highly modified farming environment.  This regional plan regime efficiently provides for a reasonable rate of takes. These save farmers and consent authorities from inefficient delay and cost in assessing everyday takes, whilst providing a pathway for specific case-by-case consideration of takes over and above the permitted amount. By contrast, the re-notified WCO proposal is still inferior to the regional plan in this regard. The WCO doesn’t envisage a reasonable permitted take to enable efficient management of the water resource, and it also unnecessarily prohibits abstraction.  The Regional Council are doing a great job & they should remain doing so. They have enough resource, power & information to keep this specified area in best state for all, not just the applicants on this WCO.  The HBRC presently administers the consent process and is adequately placed to oversee quantity allocations and impose timing restrictions as it sees fit. As unpopular as it may be at times.

7.2.3 Science and Technology  The application is not supported by more recnt advances in knowledge and understanding of the groundwater and surface water resources, in particular advances inscientific knowledge that has arisen as a direct result of the TANK process including a focus on riparian planting, to control temperature and oxygen content of the waterways.

Table 18 Submitters on issues relating to alternative processes for catchment management Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Hawkes Bay Equestrian Park (Chris Howell) 147 Lyndhurst Trust (Michael and Kathryn Kinney) 137 Munt Erin Partnership (Alexander Couper Whyte) 148 Page Bloomer Properties Ltd (Daniel Bloomer) 351 Tumu Timbers Ltd (Matthew Lawson) 360 Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Peter Matich) 347 Munt Erin Whyte (Alexander Couper Whyte) 148 Matthew Falliow Edwards 149 Edward Hill 368 Jackie Krzyzewski 146 Te Taiao Hawke’s bay Environmental Forum (Terry Kelly) 275

7.3 Water Quality

7.3.1 Irrigation Irrigation was mentioned by four submitters. Their focus was on the impacts a WCO would have on water supply for irrigation, and the health of crops.

 The preseerving of existing consents and the renewal of existing consents for the use of bore ground water, particularlyt for irrigation required for the use of productive land as recognised in the local and regional district plans, namely hortivcultural land.  We the trustees of the Lyndhurst Trust oppose the application for the Water Conservation Order for the Ngaruroro River because it may have serious repercussions for our cropping land and our access to irrigation water in the summer months  When a ban maybe coming into force, a grower must do what they can to protect their crops and their trees from dying. They therefore irrigate to replenish their soil water reserves as much as possible, so that the plants will last as long as possible. Good irrigation practice requires reliable water supply. River flows reduce in summer due to low rainfall. Putting irrigators on ban is not the best option environmentally, as river flows will drop in summer.  The WCO proposal fails to assess on the effect of the change from permitted activity to prohibited activity status for abstraction. This prohibition on abstraction in the proposed WCO will have a material effect on other farm water uses. Federated Farmers are concerned that farmers will be unjustly prohibited from abstracting to provide for irrigation or other farming uses (that are not provided for under section 14(3)(b) of the RMA).

Table 19 Submitters on issues relating to water quality Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Lawn Cottages (Craig Alexander) 17 Lyndhurst Trust (Michael and Kathryn Kinney) 137 Tumu Timbers Ltd (Matthew Lawson) 360 Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Peter Matich) 347

7.4 River Conservation

7.4.1 Rivers Not Outstanding Four submitters noted that the rivers were not outstanding in relation to section 199 of the RMA. The submissions also refer to the intensive use of the river for recreation, gravel extraction, drainage, and flood control.

 The outstanding characteristics listed in section 4 relate to Section 199 of the RMA> Section 199 requires the identification of the outstanding features. It is debatable as to whether many of the listed outstanding characteristics and features truly make the lower reaches of the Ngaruroro nationally significant or unique. There are many rivers in New Zealand where jetboating, trout fishing, duck shooting are major recreational activities. The lower reaches of the river have been highly modified over time. Gravel extraction, farming, jet boating and stopbanks all contribute to modifying the riverine environment. Applying for a blanket

conservation order for a highly modified environment with the same application as a near pristine section applies standards that can never be met in the modified environment.  We oppose the application for a WCO for the lower Ngaruroro River and the Clive River as neither meet the purpose of a WCO under section 199 (1) of the Act. 6.The lower Ngaruroro River and Clive Rivers are highly modified environments. A drainage and flood control scheme has been established on both rivers since the late 1800’s, this has since been expanded to now include: • 577 km of river, stream and drainage channels • 287 km of ‘live edge protection’ to reduce erosion and slow flood waters • 196 structures including, culverts, floodgates, control gates, weirs, rock groynes and pipelines • 5 detention dams • 18 pump stations, 7 mobile pumps and 2 emergency generators • 155 km of stop banks and deflection banks 7.  Pursuant to Section 199 of the RMA, the purpose of a water conservation order is to recognise and sustain outstanding amenity or intrinsic values. While some reaches of the Ngaruroro River are picturesque, scenic and possess a level of amenity and intrinsic values, those values are not outstanding. They are not “out of the ordinary” on a national basis.  Federated Farmers remain of the view that the applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated that the identified values of the lower and estuarine reaches of the river are of an outstanding level that warrant protection via a Water Conservation Order. To be considered outstanding, a value must have nation-wide significance, yet the values such as recreational, habitat and fish are not out of the ordinary of a national basis.

7.4.2 Rivers Outstanding Three submissions claimed that the rivers had outstanding characteristics or values, including its value as a braided river.

 ECO supports this application because the Ngaruroro is an outstanding river from both a regional and national perspective. The Ngaruroro River is one of the very few braided river systems in the North Island with an intact braided system and water quality is very high throughout the whole system.  Silver Fern Farms supports clause 7 to the extent that it is appropriate to protect waters that contribute to outstanding characteristics.  Drinking Water is a fundamental of life, therefore REQUEST that the water of Ngaruroro River be classed as `Outstanding Value’ in the WCO

7.4.3 FutureGenerations Future generations were mentioned by two submitters, noting the trade-off between economic or personal gain and future needs.

 We worry an overpowering industry body will skew the outcome here for personal gain, rather than the inter generational effect of the water body.  Other factors to be considered are the potential effect of sea level rise and population increase requiring the cities to meet an increased demand for water, not to mention economic development. It is likely that the water available will not meet the needs of all users in the future – if indeed it does now. I believe the best solutions will be realised by leaving the resolution of the issues to the HBRC and it’s ratepayers.

7.4.4 Other Federated Farmers noted that there are no outstanding natural features in the catchment, which if present, would be protected under the District plan.

 Federated Farmers consider that there is no need for a WCO in order to protect any outstanding natural features or landscapes (‘ONFL’s) that are identified within the upper Ngaruroro catchment… District Plan regimes for managing outstanding landscapes are comprehensive, with issues and threats identified, objectives and policies specified. There is a pathway for plan users to undertake a range of permitted activities, and a process for case-by- case consideration of activities that require closer scrutiny.

Table 20 Submitters on issues relating to river conservation Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Hawkes Bay Equestrian park (Chris Howell) 147 Parkers Beverage (Doug Speedy) 241 Environmental and Conservation Organisations of NZ (Maree Baker-Galloway) 336 Page Bloomer Properties Ltd (Daniel Bloomer) 351 Tumu Timbers Ltd (Matthew Lawson) 360 Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Peter Matich) 347 Silver Fern Farms (Ben Williams) 353 Matthew Falliow Edwards 149 David Renouf 041

7.5 Aquifers, Groundwater, and Surface Water Four submitters discussed aquifers, groundwater, and surface water in their submissions. The majority considered that there was a lack of understanding or proof of hydraulic/ groundwater connections.

7.5.1 Lack of understanding  Moreover, these council reports illustrate that the extent, and relationship(s), of hydraulic connections in the catchment are complicated by many variables and unknowns relating to the Heretaunga Aquifer system.  Proof required regarding connected' groundwaters  I also think it would be foolish to apply a conservation order to the lower reach until the science is concluded ie the TANK study when there will be a much better understanding of the river/aquifers and the interrelation between them.  Surely, such re-assessment is confirmation by the proposer of poor evaluation extending to and from well-known practical evidence. Evidence of support for the information long available to anyone interested enough to investigate artisan water supplies on the Heretaunga plains.

7.5.2 Protection of the Aquifer system  Because of the direct `Hydraulic Connection' with the Ngaruroro River (A) The specific recharge areas of the Ngaruroro River which provides drinking water to Hastings and Havelock North people. (B) The direct `Hydraulic Connection' with the Ngaruroro River water to the underground rivers/streams which supply the drinking water to the wells in Hastings. Request that the WCO provides the same protection to the Heretaunga Plains groundwater as to the Ngaruroro River surface because of the direct `Hydraulic Connection' with the Ngaruroro River.

Table 21 Submitters on issues relating to aquifers, groundwater, and surface water Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Peter Matich) 347 Munt Erin Partnership (Alexander Couper Whyte) 148 Matthew Falliow Edwards 149 Edward Hills 368

7.6 Consent and Resource Management Consent and resource management were mentioned five times, with Clause 12 of the WCO being a focus for groups concerned about being able to continue to carry out irrigation, the use of bore ground water, and existing water takes for construction and network utilities.

 The preserving of existing consents and the renewal of existing consents for the use of bore ground water, particularly for irrigation required for the use of productive land as recognised in the local and regional district plans, namely horticultural land. The order should be able to have a balance between these driving economic issues and achieve some of the purposes of s 199 RMA. In particular the lower part of the rivers where there is hydraulic supply of groundwater are not deficient in water level from visual observation at different times of year. The hydraulic area referenced in the additional public notice should not be included in the order.  We are neutral at this stage, but do not want to be disadvantaged in anyway. i.e. reduction in water consent  Transpower supports the exemption in Clause 12(b)(ii) for the protection and maintenance of network utility operations as the National Grid falls within the definition in section 166 of the RMA. However, it seeks amendments to clarify that the exemption also applies to operation, upgrading, development and establishment of new network utility operations.  A specific change is therefore sought to clause 12 (along with any other consequential relief) of the draft WCO to ensure that it does not unnecessarily restrict temporary water takes for construction dewatering which have limited potential to adversely affect the outstanding values and features of the catchment, particularly in the Lower Ngaruroro catchment.  Silver Fern Farms supports clause 12(d) which recognises the importance of not inhibiting existing consents through the WCO. It also recognises that such consents should be able to be replaced where the same volumes, rate of take, and minimum flow restrictions apply.

Table 22 Submitters on issues relating to consent and resource management Submitter name EPA Ref. No. Lawn Cottages (Craig Alexander) 17 Parkers Beverage (Doug Speedy) 241 Transpower NZ Ltd (Rebecca Eng) 366 Z Energy Limited, BP Oil NZ Limited, Mobil Oil NZ Limited (Mark Laurenson) 367 Silver Fern Farms (Ben Williams) 353

7.7 Fishing Two submitters discussed fishing in their submissions, noting low angler days per year, whether trout fishing is an outstanding characteristic, and the fact that trout are an introduced species.

 Federated Farmers submit that the annual usage of the Ngaruroro should be classified as ‘low significance’ in terms of the (abovementioned) RiVAS assessment - at less than 1,000 angler days per year, and not as ‘high significance’, let alone not as ‘outstanding’ on a national basis, as the applicant claims.  It may also be pertinent to mention that trout are an introduced species to this waterway, and without much commercial interest.  The outstanding characteristics listed in section 4 relate to Section 199 of the RMA> Section 199 requires the identification of the outstanding features. It is debatable as to whether many of the listed outstanding characteristics and features truly make the lower reaches of the Ngaruroro nationally significant or unique. There are many rivers in New Zealand where jetboating, trout fishing, duck shooting are major recreational activities.

Table 23 Submitters on issues relating to fishing Submitter Name EPA Ref. No. Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Peter Matich) 347 Edward Hill 368 Hawke’s Bay Equestrian Park (Chris Howell) 147

7.8 Other recreation Recreational uses were also mentioned by seven submitters, the majority considering that recreational users should not have preference over other residents/ users.

 The upper reaches of the river has values including wild, scenic and natural characteristics, habitat for native species, and recreational and scenic values. While in the lower reaches it’s braided nature, habitat provision for native birds and fish, recreational values, and high water quality make it an nationally important river system.  Federated Farmers also submit that a WCO is not necessary to achieve enhanced recreational access or tramping experience in the Ngaruroro River or Clive River catchments.  Recreational users should not take preference

 I do not have the time today to review those sections of the RMA, however it does seem unlikely that the RMA ever intended recreational groups to be able to influence water being limited or no longer supplied to landowners making fair use of their land with a permitted primary activity under existing land zoning and existing use  Venturing further into difficult territory, my personal position is that urgent resource need for food production and municipal uses trumps recreational activities. Like-wise, bore use by home residents is a function of the individual resident, who need to keep up to date on their supply issues, understanding that aquifer levels are subject to change and thus need to keep prepared for this.  Jetboating and Whitewater sports do not contribute significantly to Hawkes Bay’s economic wealth. Jetboating events, in particular, generate noise, emissions and generally disturb the water and surrounding habitat. It seems to me that these types of activities are detrimental to the wellbeing of fish, birds, other water creatures and river flora and fauna and therefore contrary to the objectives of provisions 199(b)(i), (iii) and (iv) of the Resource Management Act.  People rely on it for irrigation purposes, their livelihood, this should take precedence way above recreational pursuits.  It is debatable as to whether many of the listed outstanding characteristics and features truly make the lower reaches of the Ngaruroro nationally significant or unique. There are many rivers in New Zealand where jetboating, trout fishing, duck shooting are major recreational activities

Table 24 Submitters on issues relating to other recreation Submitter name EPA Ref. No. Environmental and Conservation Organisations of NZ (Maree Baker-Galloway) 336 Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Peter Matich) 347 Munt Erin Whyte (Alexander Couper Whyte) 148 The Oakburn Trust (Deborah and Robert Burnside) 274 Edward Hill 368 Jackie Krzyzewski 146 Pam Kyle 024 Hawke’s Bay Equestrian Park (Chris Howell) 147

7.9 Ecology Ecological factors were mentioned by the two environmental organisations that submitted, noting the important ecological, scientific, and habitat values of the rivers.

 Our continuing involvement in the TANK process in the past 12 months since our initial submission in August 2017 has further reinforced the importance of a ‘mountains to the sea’ approach which in our view recognises the ecological significance of both the upper and lower sections of the Ngaruroro... We refer to Dr McQueeen’s previous evidence of the outstanding fish and bird values, particularly in the mid-reaches (braided river section) of the Ngauroro river and the importance of a mountain to the sea approach. These important values must include habitat and migratory pathways which therefore concludes there are

outstanding/significant ecological and scientific values of the lower catchment in terms of fish passage-ways and feeding and breeding habitat s for both fish and birds (e.g. banded dotteral and black billed gull). Water levels and water quality for the mid to lower sections of the river are critical for the effectiveness of fish migration pathways and the use of backwaters for threatened fish such as dwarf glaxiid and lamprey.  The entire river, including the Clive river, provides rare and important habitat for native birds and fish.

Table 25 Submitters on issues relating to ecology Submitter name EPA Ref. No. Te Taiao Hawkes bay Environment Forum (Terry Kelly) 275 Environmental and Conservation Organisations of NZ (Maree Baker-Galloway) 336

8. Requested Changes and Comments to the Tribunal

Table 26 sets out those submitters who had requested changes to the WCO.

Table 26 Requested changes and comments to the WCO by submitters

EPA Reference Number Submitter/s Name Requested Changes

17 Lawn Cottages Limited (Craig Alexander) ‘The order should allow the preserving of existing consents and the renewal of existing consents for the use of ground bore water, particularly for irrigation required for the use of productive land as recognised in the local and regional District plans, namely horticultural land.’

366 Transpower New Zealand Limited (Rebecca Eng) ‘Transpower supports the exemption in Clause 12(b)(ii) for the protection and maintenance of network utility operations as the National Grid falls within the definition in section 166 of the RMA. However, it seeks amendments to clarify that the exemption also applies to operation, upgrading, development and establishment of new network utility operations.

Relief sought:

“b. Subject to sub-clause (c), this Order does not restrict or prevent the grant of resource consents or inclusion of a rule in a regional plan for the purpose of:

ii. the removal, maintenance or protection of any road, ford or bridge, the maintenance, or protection, operation, upgrading, development, and establishment of any network utility operation (as defined in section 166 of the Act) or the maintenance or operation of the Ngaruroro Flood Protection Drainage Scheme; or the protection of human or animal health.”’

147 Hawke's Bay Equestrian Park (Chris Howell) ‘Grant the order for a WCO in the upper reaches of the Ngaruroro River Decline the order for a WCO over the lower reaches of the Ngaruroro River’

‘Could the Special Tribunal set up for the Water Conservation Order for the 41 David Renouf Ngaruroro and Clive rivers consider — Because of the direct `Hydraulic Connection' with the Ngaruroro River (A) The specific recharge areas of the Ngaruroro River which provides drinking water to Hastings and Havelock North people. (B) The direct `Hydraulic Connection' with the Ngaruroro River water to the underground rivers/streams which supply the drinking water to the wells in Hastings Request that the WCO provides the same protection to the Heretaunga Plains groundwater as to the Ngaruroro River surface because of the direct `Hydraulic Connection' with the Ngaruroro River Drinking Water is a fundamental of life, therefore REQUEST that the water of Ngaruroro River be classed as `Outstanding Value' in the WCO REQUEST That the three recharge areas, which are directly `Hydraulic Connected' to the Ngaruroro River surface water are included into the WCO so that these three river main stem recharge reaches are specifically protected. Some conditions recommended 1. No consolidation of river bed within the recharge reach areas by vehicles and machinery 2. River water bed not to be disturbed 3. No activity which will create any sediments in the river water within or 3 km above the recharge reach areas

Appendix 1: Full List of Submitters

The list is provided alphabetically (by organisation or last name), and then numerically (by EPA reference number). Information in this table has been produced by a combination of computer generated and manual analysis, and therefore the numbers may not align with those stated within the main text of this report.

Full List (alphabetically) EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

205 Aaron Kearns Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

269 Abbie Taylor Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

247 Abby Owsley Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

42 Aileen Campbell Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

307 Al Green Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

266 Alexander Strever Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

148 Mount Erin Alexander Whyte Organisation No Oppose Decline the Order No Partnership Couper

199 Alice Hicks Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

362 Alice Wilson Individual No Support Grant the Order Yes Used Forest and Bird Milne web page to submit

325 Alie McPherson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

203 Alienor Izri Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

306 Alison Gray Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

323 alison martin Individual Yes Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

352 Alison Wallbutton Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

88 Amy Mccomb (Blank) No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

259 Anais Schanzel Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

169 Andrew Cox Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

369 Andrew Hall Individual No Neutral Neutral No

76 Andrew John Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

330 Andrew Pauli Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

240 Angela Murton Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

113 Angela Scroggins Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

66 Anita Frencken Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

292 Ann Cook Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

33 Anna Beard Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

233 Anna Meakin Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

260 Anna Schimmel Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

117 Anna Solano Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

348 Annabelle Tucker Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

62 Anne Farmer Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

60 Annie de Groot Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

157 Arne Buchmann Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

280 Audrey Ashman Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

123 Barbara Thomborson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

47 Barry Christiansen Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

286 Bella Burgess Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

316 Bella Hura Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

16 Ben Hubbard Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

353 SILVER FERN Ben Williams Organisation Yes Neutral Neutral Yes FARMS LIMITED

315 Benjamin Hunt Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

167 Bernadette Cornille Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

79 Beth Jones Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

165 Beverley Collison Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

30 beverly barnes Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

40 Brendan Cameron Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

272 Brendan Veale Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

120 Brendon Strong Individual Yes Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

166 Brian Connelly Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

294 Brian Cumber Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird (submitted a web page to submit duplicate)

326 Brian Megaw Individual No Support Grant the Order Yes Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

81 brien lampen- Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird smith web page to submit

250 Bruce Philpott Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

44 Caitlin Carew Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

303 Carey Gary Individual No Support Grant the Order Yes Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

151 Carolyn Batenburg Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

265 carolyn sparks Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

346 Carolyn Theiler- Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Prebble web page to submit

251 Catherine Pollock Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

130 Catherine Vile Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

278 Cathrine Ackroyd Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

331 Chalice Penman Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

279 Chelsea Allen- Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Brough web page to submit

196 Chris Grose Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

147 Hawke's Bay Chris Howell Organisation No Oppose Grant the Order No Equestrian Park with changes

128 Chris van de Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Molen web page to submit

281 Christine B. Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

209 Christine Leslie Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

112 Christine Schuler Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

261 Christopher Simmons Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

101 Claudelle Murray Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

182 Clay Elgar Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

298 Clint Deckard Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

109 Colin Pitt Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

91 Courtney Mcnatty Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

17 Lawn Cottages Craig Alexander Organisation No Support Grant the Order No Limited with changes

144 cushla barfoot Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird (submitted a web page to submit duplicate)

207 Cynthia Kingi Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

314 dan houston Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

93 Dan Miller Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

351 Page Bloomer Daniel Bloomer Organisation Yes Oppose Decline the Order No Properties Ltd

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

285 Daniel Bristow Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

340 Darrin Smith Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

141 David Atkinson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

162 David Clarke Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

57 David Cullen Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

186 David Gallie Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

41 David Renouf Individual Yes Support but Grant the Order No prefer to with changes preserve different features and qualities of the water bodies

116 David Smith Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

274 The Oakburn Deborah Burnside Individual No Oppose Decline the Order Unsure Trust - landowner and Robert

290 Debra Chalmers Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

74 Deidre Jackson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

342 Diana Stein Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

73 Diane Hunt Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

224 Donald Matheson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

339 Donna Schuler Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

241 PARKERS Doug Speedy Organisation Yes Neutral Neutral No Beverage Company

156 Edgar Brooker (Blank) No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

368 Edward Hill Individual Yes, and Oppose Decline the Order No (Ted) yes to joint case

321 Elizabeth Lamburn Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

268 ELIZABETH TANNER Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

177 Ellen Donnelly Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

172 Ellery Daines Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

318 Elysia Johnstpm Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

361 Emily Wilson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

28 Emma Applegate Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

189 Emma Gibbs Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

327 Emma Merry Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

237 Emma Morris Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

191 Faye Goggin Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

317 Fiona James Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

238 Fiona Morris Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

154 Fran Bell Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

85 Francesca Mackenzie Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

176 Frank Dohmen Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

364 Freda Woisin Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

135 Garrett Yeoman Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

312 Gerard Henry Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

252 Gillian Pollock Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

344 Gillian Stringer Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

25 Gina Aitken Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

304 Glenn Good Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

337 Gowan Robertson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

213 Graham Lindsay Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

108 Graham Palmer Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

163 Grant Clothier Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

15 Guy Mexted Individual No Support Grant the Order Yes

180 Helena Duggan Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

132 Hori Waihirere Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

31 IAN BARNES Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

94 Irene Minhinnick Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

111 Jack Roberts Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

164 Jackie Cockeram Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

146 Jackie Krzyzewski Individual No Oppose Decline the Order No

287 Jacob Butler Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

46 Jake Chapman- Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Olsen web page to submit

142 James Baker Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

228 James McConachie Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

262 James Simpson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

222 Jane Lovell Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird (submitted web page to submit two duplicates)

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

365 Jane Young Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

200 Janet Hollow Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

129 Janet Vaughan Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

195 Jared Gray Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

56 jarrod crossland (Blank) No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

170 Jason Cox Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

297 Jennifer Deans Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

69 Jennifer Hartley Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

194 Jeremy Graham Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

115 jeremy smart Individual No Support Grant the Order Yes Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

80 Jess Keast Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

84 Jesse Macilquham Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

273 Jessica Vereijssen Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

255 Jessie Rawnsley Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

197 Jill Hamel Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

171 Jo Crawford Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

119 jody stent Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

26 Johanna Aldridge Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

34 Johanna Bloomberg Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

313 John Hopkins Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

220 John Lovell Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

104 John Newson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

254 John Prince Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

178 Josephine Dorofaeff Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

86 Josephine Mahar Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

291 Josh Clark Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

168 Josie Coultard Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

234 Joy Mintorn Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

239 Judith Murphy Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

187 Julie Gardiner Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

263 Julie Simpson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

100 Justin Murphy Individual Yes Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

75 Karin Johansson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

310 Kassandra Harker Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

96 Kate Moriarty Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

324 Kath Mcdonald Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

138 Katharina Achterberg Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

334 Katherine Purchas Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

39 Kathleen Cain Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

181 Kathleen Dwyer Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

215 Kathleen Logan Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

83 Kay Lyall Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

102 Kay Neich Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

335 Kaye Reardon Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

231 Kelly Mckenzie Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

21 Kelsi Individual No Support Grant the Order No

133 Kelvin Walls Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

82 Kerry Lowry Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

226 Kevin Matthews Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

243 Kilda Northcott Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

155 Kiri Bhana Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

122 Kirsty Taiaroa Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

126 L Torr Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

90 Lauren McInteer Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

288 leanne campbell Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

161 Leanne Catchpole Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

107 Lexi Oulsnam Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

319 Liana Kelly Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

236 Lianne Moore Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

59 Linda Dingfelder Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

257 Linda Robinson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

206 Linda Jane Keegan Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

37 Lindsey Britton Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

223 Lisa Malde Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

230 Lisa Mcilwraith Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

145 Lorraine Barnes Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

127 Lucy Treep Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

345 Lynette Taylor Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

284 Machteld Belsack Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

232 Mandy McMullin Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

336 ENVIRONMENT Maree Baker- Organisation Yes Support Grant the Order No AND Galloway CONSERVATION ORGANISATIONS OF NZ INC.

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

227 Margaret Matthews Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

193 Mari Gordon Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

64 Marie Fleming Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

355 Marie- Ward Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Louise web page to submit

328 Marilyn Millington Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

140 Marion Arts Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

218 Marjan Lousberg Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

77 Mark Johnson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

367 Z Energy Limited, Mark Laurenson Organisation Yes Neutral Neutral N/A BP Oil NZ Limited, Mobil Oil NZ Limited

333 Marnie Prickett Individual Yes Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

52 Mary Coupe Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

72 Mary Hitchens Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

202 Mary Hutchinson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

106 Mary Nuttall Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

244 Mary O'Connell Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

51 Matt Couldrey Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

360 Tumu Timbers Ltd Matthew Lawson Organisation Yes Oppose Decline the Order N/A

149 Matthew Edwards Individual Yes Support but N/A No Falliow prefer to preserve a different but related water body in the same catchment

299 Maureen Dewar Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

332 maureen powell Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

158 Maurice Bycroft Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

338 Megan Rutherford Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

354 Melissa Ward Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

54 Michael Craddock Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

357 Michael Watson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

137 Lyndhurst Trust Michael and Kinney Organisation No Oppose Decline the Order No Kathryn

35 Michelle Boulle Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

179 Michelle Ducat Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

343 Michelle Stewart Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

270 Michelle Trusttum Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

245 Mike O'Grady Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

114 Milika Shilton Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

225 Moire Mathieson Individual No Support Grant the Order Yes Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

70 Murray Henderson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

185 nancy fulford Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

38 Natasha Burton Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

309 Neil Hamilton Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

175 Neville Denton Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

61 Nicholas Drake Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

198 Nicholas Hickling Individual Yes Support Grant the Order N/A Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

192 Nick Goldwater Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

341 Nicki Smith Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

110 Nicola Renwick Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

208 Nina Laube Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

124 Norman Tolra Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

302 Olive Gardner Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

150 Oliver Bassett Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

214 p.d.r lindsay- Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird salmon web page to submit

24 Pam Kyle Individual No Oppose Decline the Order No

55 patricia cree Individual Yes Support Grant the Order N/A Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

256 Patricia Reddy Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

249 Patricia Seyb Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

289 Paul Carlyon Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

210 Paul Leslie Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

99 Paul Murney Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

105 Paul Newton- Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Jackson web page to submit

349 Paul Tudor Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

63 Peggy Fittes Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

322 Pepijn Luiten Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

152 Peter Beaver Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

211 Peter Levin Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

347 Federated Peter Matich Organisation Yes Oppose Decline the Order Yes Farmers of New Zealand

300 Phil Etheridge Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

229 Philip McGowan Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

235 Rachel Mitchell (Blank) No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

248 Raewyn Raewyn, Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Park web page to submit

217 Ralph Loughrey Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

153 Ray Beentjes Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

366 Transpower New Rebecca Eng Organisation Yes Neutral Grant the Order No Zealand Limited with changes

305 Rebecca Goodyear Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

350 Rene Vries Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

282 Ric Balfour Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

283 Richard Bearne Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

201 Richard Honiss Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

118 Rita Steel Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

95 Robert Mohi Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

78 Robyn Johnson Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

19 Rowan Kent Individual No Oppose Decline the Order No

311 Rowena Harris Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

308 Sally Grimmett Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

296 Sam De Schot Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

174 Sam Dearlove Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

98 Samuel Moss Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

45 Sandy Caulton Individual No Support Grant the Order N/A Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

359 Sandy Wild Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

160 Sarah Carville Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

258 Sarah-Jane Saravani Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

143 Sayeri Banerjee Individual Yes Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

22 sean harvey Individual No Oppose Decline the Order Unsure

204 Serena Jones Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

190 Shannon Gilmore Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

370 Shand Lesley and N/A N/A Support Grant the Order Unsure Late Submission Helen

293 Sharon Cope Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

67 Shaun Gilbert Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

216 Shaun Lott Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

50 Shauna Costello (Blank) No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

358 Simon Waugh Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

159 Simone Cameron Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

320 Stephanie Kerrisk Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

92 Stephanie Mearns Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

264 Steve Smith Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

121 Stroud Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Family web page to submit

183 sue fitchett Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

71 Susan Hickey Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

97 Susan Morpeth Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

356 susan washington Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

131 Tanja Wagner Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

49 Tanya Cook Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

134 Tanya Withers Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

329 Terre Nicholson Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

275 Te Taiao Hawkes Terry Kelly Iwi Yes Support Grant the Order Yes Bay Environment Forum

48 Tony Connolly Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

246 Tony Orman (Blank) No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

363 Tony Winter Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

295 Trace Custer Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

43 Tracey Campbell Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

20 Tracey Kent Individual No Oppose Decline the Order No

184 Trevor FitzJohn Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

32 Vanessa Barry Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

271 Vasiliki, Vaiese Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Vasiliki web page to submit

68 Victoria Goodier Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

27 Vikki Ambrose Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

301 Wendy Fowler Individual No Support Grant the Order Unsure Used Forest and Bird (submitted a web page to submit duplicate)

89 Wendy McGee Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

188 Whitney Geary Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

87 William matthews Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

253 william powell Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

267 William Stringer Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

212 Wright Liam Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

103 Zooey Neumann Individual No Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird web page to submit

EPA Ref Organisation Last Name First name Type Request to Position Recommendation Submitted Notes No. be Heard Sought in Stage 1?

242 New Zealand Organisation Yes Support Grant the Order No Used Forest and Bird Federation of web page to submit Frehwater Anglers Inc