NAVIGATION REPORT ON NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON’S PROPOSAL FOR NEW SALMON FARMS IN THE MARLBOROUGH SOUNDS 29 SEPTEMBER 2011 BY DAVID WALKER
CONTENTS PAGE NO.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 INTRODUCTION 3 Current Position 3 History of involvement in Marlborough Sounds 3 Aquaculture 3 Maritime education and training 4 Qualifications 4 Experience on large vessels 5 Key references 5 SCOPE OF REPORT 7 THE MARLBOROUGH SOUNDS FROM A NAVIGATION PERSPECTIVE: 8 Navigation 8 Electronic Navigation 9 Weather 11 Visibility 11 Fog 11 Tides 12 Marine farms 13 NAVIGATION IN QUEEN CHARLOTTE SOUND 13 NAVIGATION IN TORY CHANNEL 14 PELORUS SOUND 16 PORT GORE 17 NAVIGATION AND SALMON FARMS 19 Commercial vessels over 500 gross tonnage within the designated Pilotage Area 19 Commercial small boats 21 Recreational small boats 22 Collisions between vessels and marine farms 23 INTERACTIONS BETWEEN VESSELS AND MARINE FARMS 25 Beneficial effects of the farms on navigational safety 26 NAVIGATIONAL ISSUES RELATING TO THE PROPOSED SITES 26 Waitata Reach 26 Papatua 28 Ngamahau 30 Ruaomoko and Kaitapeha 33 CONDITIONS TO BE IMPOSED 36 Notification to Mariners/Education 36 Buoyage 37 Restricted visibility 37 Lighting 38 Engineering 39 AIS 40 Emergency procedures 41
Executive summary
1. This report was commissioned by The New Zealand NZ King Salmon Company Ltd (NZ King Salmon) and assesses the effects of NZ King Salmon’s proposal for nine new marine farm sites on navigation in the Marlborough Sounds. In summary, my view as an experienced navigator, both within the Marlborough Sounds and elsewhere, is that provided the farms operate under an appropriate set of conditions the farms will have the following effect on navigation:
a. Waitata, Tapipi, Richmond, Kaitira and White Horse Rock: they will be objects which will need to be navigated around. Other than that the farms pose no issue;
b. Papatua’s effects will be negligible. It is a remote part of the Sounds with very little traffic;
c. Ruaomoko and Kaitapeha are sufficiently distant from the ferry track so as to enable a deviation from the inward track to safely take place and to provide for additional safe passage for small vessels between the ferry track, the farm and the shore;
d. In the case of Ngamahau, this farm is located sufficiently far off the normal ferry track to not be a danger to navigation. There is sufficient sea room for small vessels to transit between the shore, the farm and the ferry track.
2. In terms of conditions:
a. Each farm will need to be appropriately lit at night. Decisions about appropriate lighting are made by the Harbourmaster. The lighting on NZ King Salmon’s existing farms are, to my mind, appropriate. I would add that the lights on each farm should be synchronised to enable easier comprehension of the form of the structure at night;
b. I do not recommend additional buoyage;
c. The Harbourmaster may wish to consider audible signals during periods of restricted visibility (fog);
d. All structures must be engineered to minimise the risk that the structure will become free. This is particularly the case for the Ngamahau farm. A maintenance regime must be designed by an appropriately qualified and experienced engineer.
e. I recommend that NZ King Salmon have documented emergency procedures which are approved by the Harbourmaster should any failure of moorings occur;
f. I recommend that navigation warnings and notices to mariners be issued prior to and at the time of the structures being installed. An education campaign could target recreational craft which do not know of or pay attention to such notices;
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 2/41
g. I recommend each farm located in Tory Channel have installed a Class B AIS Transporter, installed in accordance with the directions of the Harbourmaster.
Introduction
Current Position
3. I am a master with Interislander, recently serving on the Arahura, the Aratere and the Monte Stello Cook Strait ferries.
History of life and involvement in Marlborough Sounds
4. In brief, I grew up in the Pelorus Sounds and worked in my grandfather’s long established family business, Eric Johnson and Sons Ltd. The business involved passenger vessels, mail launch contracts and barging operations. As a family we were also involved in logging the last native timber available and in general bulldozer work in the Sounds.
5. Also during this period we had the use of, and later owned, one of the last coastal scows, the Vesper, which we used to carry logs and machinery as well as a support vessel. Also, for a short period during this time I was commercial fishing in my own vessel.
6. I then went to sea and was away from the area almost continuously for about four years, by which time I was a qualified junior deck officer and working under a contract that meant I worked less than six months a year at sea. By this time, Eric Johnson and Sons Ltd had been split up and parts sold off. The Vesper was converted to a dumb barge (a barge without propulsion) at Ministry of Transport’s insistence and became part of (the now separate) Johnson’s Barge Service.
7. The last years of native timber logging we spent at Port Gore and the last major bulldozing work at Onapua in Tory Channel doing pine plantation preparation work. At about this time we converted the remaining passenger vessel for trawling and marine farm work which we then continued for a number of years.
Aquaculture
8. I, through a family trust, am a member of the Marine Farming Association. The trust owns mussel farms at: Yncyca Bay, Old Homewood Bay and Port Gore. Within my immediate family there are also marine farms owned at Maori Bay and Kingfish Bay, Port Underwood.
9. I have previously appeared as a witness on navigational matters involving aquaculture before the Marlborough District Council. Some farms I have supported. Other farms I have opposed.
10. I have no financial interest in salmon farming.
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 3/41
Maritime Education and Training
11. By 1986 I had left the sea and was working as a tutor and later an examiner, at the New Zealand School of Fisheries based in Nelson. I was involved in teaching and examining all subject areas (except engineering) in all statutory grades up to Skipper of a Deep Sea Fishing Vessel and in the recreational (Coastguard) certificates. There were however, specialist subjects taught at the school outside the statutory certificate system in which I had no involvement.
Qualifications
12. I obtained the qualification of master of a Foreign Going Ship in 1980. This entitles me to command any vessel anywhere in the world so long as I hold the appropriate ancillary certificates for specialist vessels.
13. Immediately following that I did the part of the Extra Master syllabus relating to Magnetic Compass, after the requisite amount of practical experience obtained a licence to act as a Compass Adjuster.
14. All commercial vessels are required to be surveyed. As part of the requirements for a vessel to be “in survey” the magnetic compass must be calibrated. As a local compass adjuster I meet many of the skippers operating commercial vessels in the Sounds.
15. I hold the entry level engineering qualification so that I can operate as an Inshore Launch Master. This allows me to have sole charge of vessels operating near shore. The size of vessels is dependent on the class and actual area of operation.
16. Currently I hold qualifications which allow me to be exempt from carrying a pilot (on designated vessels) for the Queen Charlotte Sound, Tory Channel and Wellington Pilotage districts.
17. In the past I have held “Pilot Exemption Certificates” for Auckland, Tauranga, Lyttelton and Timaru.
18. During the time spent on oil tankers I held a Class I Tanker Endorsement to allow me to be in charge of tanker cargo operations.
19. During the time spent at NZ School of Fisheries, apart from the various certificates for attendance at tutor training courses etc, I held a certificate to act as an Examiner for all statutory grades up to and including Skipper, Deep Sea Fishing Vessel.
20. The NZ Maritime School in Auckland wanted an examiner “outside” their system, so I started into the process of becoming qualified to examine Foreign Going qualifications. However I found, once I had begun the process, there were too many demands on my time so I did not pursue it.
21. I am currently only examining Local Launch Operator and Inshore Launch Master candidates.
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 4/41
Experience on large vessels
22. During my first period at sea, I worked on various ship types including roll on roll off vessels, bulk cargo, general cargo vessels and oil tankers.
23. After a period ashore of about nine years, I returned to sea as one of the masters on the first of the fast ferries. Without going into any detail, this whole operation was seriously flawed, so I left as soon as possible.
24. I then joined Strait Shipping with the arrival of their second vessel, Suiliven.
25. An opportunity arose to be involved as master on a new coastal roll on roll off service on the vessel Bass Reefer. With the halving of freight rates on the coast that business folded. I then joined Silver Fern Shipping working on the coastal tankers until 2000.
26. In 1999 I started working for Interisland Line on a part time basis, leaving Coastal Tankers in 2000 and becoming full time with Interisland Line initially as a junior officer. With the arrival of the vessel “Purbeck” into the fleet, I joined as Mate, then became master soon after. I returned to the main fleet after the charter of the Purbeck finished.
27. With the recent departure of the Aratere to Singapore for modifications, I spent a short time on Monte Stello, which is being used as a fill in vessel until the Aratere’s return.
Key references
28. In this report I will refer to some key references.
29. The United Kingdom Hydrographic office publishes a set of Sailing Directions designed for use by the merchant mariner on all classes of ocean-going vessels with essential information on all aspects of navigation. Sailing Directions are complementary to Admiralty Standard Nautical Charts and provide worldwide coverage in 74 volumes. Volume 51, also known as The New Zealand Pilot, is the relevant volume for New Zealand.
30. The New Zealand Pilot is considered to include up-to-date information about navigating vessels around New Zealand shores. The Pilot provides information, general description of the area, hazards, pilotage regulations, traffic regulations, reporting regulations, anchorages, sailing directions and cautions. The Pilot is aimed at larger ships and does not contain all information which, for example, a pleasure craft may require.
31. Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) produces official nautical charts to aid safe navigation in New Zealand waters and certain areas of Antarctica and the South-West Pacific. Charts relevant to this proposal are:
a. NZ6152 (Pelorus Sound and Havelock);
b. NZ6153 (Queen Charlotte Sound);
c. NZ6154 (Tory Channel Entrance and Picton Harbour).
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 5/41
32. Using charts safely involves keeping them up-to-date using Notices to Mariners. Notices to Mariners are published fortnightly. The New Zealand Notices to Mariners are the authority for correcting New Zealand and British Admiralty charts of the New Zealand area of charting responsibility.
33. The New Zealand Cruising Guide: “Central Areas” was first published in 1979. It was compiled by Keith Murray and Baron Ralph Von Kohorn with assistance from a number of people with extensive local knowledge and experience of the Marlborough Sounds. The most recent 8th edition is dated 2006.
34. This publication is used by recreational boaties and has no official standing and as such is not required to be carried on a ship. The strength of this publication is from the input of the many experienced contributors providing information regarding bay and land shape, sea floor, tide and weather that does not need updating and is therefore useful in this situation. The weakness of this publication is that there is no effective updating of the information as new editions are published.
35. Unfortunately since the first edition the only changes that appear to have been made in subsequent editions are to the lights and their characteristics. I have made several attempts to get other irregularities corrected without success.
36. In the context of this report four errors are relevant.
a. Page 61, paragraph 2 of Tory Channel - “When travelling with the current maximum lift from this tidal stream is gained in the centre of the channel.” Some years ago Tory Channel was given the status of a “narrow channel”. Under the rules, vessels are to keep as far as practicable to the starboard side of the channel. Perhaps a ferry master’s worst experiences in dealing with small traffic in the channel is meeting or coming up behind visiting yachts proceeding along the channel often on the ferry track towards the centre of the channel.
b. The diagram of the Light on East Head on page 61 is sectored the wrong way around showing green where it should be red and vice versa.
c. Page 61, Paragraph 2 - The advice given in this paragraph is dangerous because a low powered vessel is told they “will find the least current close to West Head as far as Taranaki Rock. From there the boat should be headed for Okukari Bay.” In effect, this advises the vessel to cross the entrance. In southerly conditions the ferries also want to be just south of the leads at the entrance and travelling up the interface between the eddy and the outgoing tide. Furthermore, once a low powered vessel gets to Taranaki Rock they try to cross to the starboard side of the channel. If they are only doing three knots against the tide it can take the best part of an hour from the time they enter the controlled navigation zone until the time they leave it at Scraggy Point. During 24 hours with five ferries operating there will
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 6/41
be 24 transits of this channel by a ship. By the law of averages they will meet a ferry in this time.
d. The radio information in the Guide has been erroneous for at least the past fifteen years. Channel 19 and the ten minute call procedure is not detailed on page 62, meaning that a vessel may not be aware that a ferry is approaching.
37. I will be referring to this publication in relation to bay and land shape, sea floor, tide and weather alone.
Scope of Report
38. I have been asked by NZ King Salmon to provide my professional opinion on navigational issues surrounding the nine proposed sites. My report concerns the impact on both large ships and smaller craft. While the decision on how the farms are to be lit has yet to be made, I am happy to recommend layout for an effective buoyage and lighting system that would provide safe navigation to mariners.
39. My evidence is based on my own knowledge and my experience in the Marlborough Sounds as detailed above.
40. I have also referred to a series of documents which assist in assessing whether marine farming would cause a navigational issue. Before referring to those documents, I stress that it is the responsibility of the navigator to actually be safe. This is detailed in Rule 22.40 of the Maritime Rules which is analogous to Rule 2 of the International Regulations For Preventing Collisions At Sea 1972 (the “General Prudential Rule”). What is paramount is the avoiding or minimising the effects of a collision, as opposed to blindly following the rules to the letter.
41. In the course of my assessment I have considered:
a. The International Regulations For Preventing Collisions At Sea 1972;
b. The Maritime Rules made by the Minister of Transport under the Maritime Transport Act 1994;
c. The Navigation Bylaws 2009 which are in force within the Marlborough Sounds which were made by the Marlborough District Council;
d. The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010;
e. Marlborough Regional Policy Statement 1995;
f. The Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan 2003;
g. The Guidelines for Aquaculture Management Areas and Marine Farms issued by Maritime New Zealand in December 2005;
h. The New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code 2004;
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 7/41
i. Guidelines for Port and Harbour Risk Assessment and Safety Management Systems in New Zealand issued by Maritime New Zealand in 2004.
42. With all of these documents, one must always return to the touchstone of navigational safety. Safeguards should exist to ensure that any risks are as low as reasonably practical.1
43. The Maritime New Zealand Guidelines for aquaculture management areas and marine farms in Appendix 2 sets out criteria to assist in a navigational assessment. Summarising those criteria, I have considered, as part of this assessment (among other factors):
a. Ensuring a sufficient clearance between mean low water and the inshore boundary of the farm;
b. A sufficient clearance to jetties and other points of regular use;
c. A sufficient clearance to any headland;
d. A sufficient clearance to any water-ski lanes or areas;
e. A sufficient clearance to any recognised navigational route;
f. Weather, currents, and tides;
g. Positioning in respect of narrow channels, navigational bottlenecks and port approaches;
h. Not impeding access to bays or impeding navigation within bays;
i. Positioning with respect to the anchorages and moorings;
j. The type, number and proximity of recreational users;
k. The access to dwellings and other foreshore;
l. The shape of the proposed farms;
44. With all sets of criteria they tend to over-emphasise some aspects and under-emphasise others. While these sorts of headings are useful, their overall intent must be to minimise navigation risk not merely comply with a set of criteria.
The Marlborough Sounds from a Navigation Perspective
Navigation
45. Navigation is the art of finding the vessel’s position at sea, and conducting her safely from place of departure to destination.2
46. The Marlborough Sounds are a series of flooded valleys. The Sounds are characterised by long inlets and steep hills rising usually to 600m but up to 1,000m or more in places. From a navigation perspective the area is complex with a strongly indented coastline. In
1 New Zealand Port and Harbour Marine Safety Code, paragraph 2.1.1C 2 Mike Scanlan Safety in Small Craft NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 8/41
parts of the Sounds there is a significant amount of boat traffic. Other parts of the Sounds see very little boat traffic.
47. Within the Marlborough Sounds, the most demanding areas for conducting a vessel safely are the seaward entrance to Tory Channel and French Pass. There are obviously other areas that call for a heightened level of awareness.
48. Throughout the Sounds there are many sunken rocks, dangerous to navigation, all of which are charted. Nowadays the most dangerous ones are marked with beacons. Improving navigational aids (buoys, beacons, lights) is an on-going process.
49. All of the Marlborough Sounds are within the Marlborough Sounds harbour limits. This means that the Marlborough District Council Navigation Bylaw 2009 applies, subject to the Maritime Rules
50. Within the harbour limits, large vessels (greater than 500 gross tonnage3 within Queen Charlotte Sound, Pelorus Sound, Admiralty Bay and French Pass, greater than 350 gross tonnage within Tory Channel4) are required to have a pilot on board, or the master of the ship needs to be exempt from that requirement. The pilotage limits are defined in the Navigation Bylaw, but in rough terms includes an area 3.5 nautical miles out from Tory Channel, all of Queen Charlotte Sounds and Pelorus Sound, Admiralty Bay and French Pass.
Electronic Navigation
51. With the advent of small boat radar, GPS and the associated electronics, there has been a revolution in navigation in the Sounds. These systems appear reliable.
52. The coverage of marine VHF radio is not complete on channel 16, but local repeaters exist to give good coverage on working channels.
53. The primary barrier to having these technologies on recreational vessels is cost. A fixed VHF radio would cost approximately $250.00. A chart plotter would cost in the order of $2,000.00. Radar would be installed on almost all commercial boats and large pleasure craft.
3 Refer Maritime Rule 48 for the calculation of tonnage 4 Refer Maritime Rules Part 90 NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 9/41
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 10/41
Weather
54. New Zealand’s geographical position and the topography of the land surrounding Cook Strait creates an area, which by usual world standards is subject to frequent gales particularly during the winter months. These gales may present difficulties in berthing large vessels but also add to the risks involved with Tory Channel entrance. The strength and gusty nature of these winds can present real difficulty for small craft.
55. The El Nino/La Nina phases, the so called Southern Oscillation, have a large bearing on the prevailing wind direction at the time. El Nino gives rise to prevailing South Westerly winds in the Tasman Sea which become North Westerly through Cook Strait
56. The prevailing winds are from the North West. South-South East winds are common.
57. The hills of the Sounds can create a funnelling effect. Winds which are benign can shift to being dangerous within a short distance or in a short period of time.
58. Wind running over a large expanse of water (called ‘fetch’) can result in large waves. Given that the land form of the Marlborough Sounds protects much of the Sounds from this sort of wave, navigators in the Marlborough Sounds do not experience significant wave heights until they reach one of the entrances. A notable exception to this is Tawhitinui Reach. North West wind is funnelled over from the Croisilles and the Current Basin and can raise a large sea. South East winds are also severe in this area and can create the same problem particularly wind against tide in the vicinity of Tawhero Point.
Visibility
59. When navigators refer to visibility, they are usually referring to meteorological conditions reducing the ability to see at a distance. On a fine day, with little sea spray, visibility can be in excess of 30 nautical miles, so a vessel is clearly visible on the sea horizon in fine weather. Visibility in the Sounds is generally limited by terrain more than weather.
60. The Marlborough Sounds is an area where heavy rainfall is occasionally recorded with falls of up to 50mm per hour recently recorded in Havelock. This type of heavy rain reduces visibility to less than 0.5 nautical miles.
61. Radar reception is also affected by heavy rain to the point where small targets will be lost in the rain clutter (interference to radar reception that can usually be minimised with correct setting of the controls). However, the large steel structures envisaged in all but the Port Gore sites make excellent radar targets, often better than the land itself.
Fog
62. Fog is an extreme loss of visibility and is common in the winter months.
63. Sea, or advection fog happens when a warm air mass moves over a colder sea and is cooled below its dew point. This is more common in Cook Strait but happens occasionally in the Sounds. Sea fog normally occurs in North Easterly conditions and is described fully
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 11/41
in the New Zealand Pilot. Although the Pilot refers to only two days of sea fog per year in Wellington, last year for example, we experienced several days of fog including almost four days of continuous fog in Wellington harbour.
64. Land, or radiation fog is by far the most common, forming during cold clear nights predominantly in the surrounding valleys, then draining out into the Sounds. Land fog forms locally as well when conditions are ideal. The fog usually disperses by late morning.
65. The Pelorus Valley produces fog which may drain out as far as the Pelorus Sound entrance. It also spills across the Linkwater isthmus and together with the fog that forms there can fill the inner Queen Charlotte Sound as well.
66. Fog has little effect on radar reception and as fog is usually associated with light winds, there is little sea clutter on the radar screen so good radar reception is normal.
Tides
67. Tides are described in terms of range and flow. Range is the vertical movement of water between low tide and high tide. This varies according to the phases of the moon. Flow is the horizontal movement of water.
68. When the tide is flooding the water is flowing into the area and when the tide is ebbing the tide is going out. The range and flow vary greatly around the coast due to factors such as topography.
69. In simplest terms the area of Cook Strait and the Marlborough Sounds are affected by two entirely different tidal systems, the Pacific and the Tasman Sea. Cook Strait is a meeting point for these two systems, causing relatively large tidal flow, but relatively small tidal range. For example, Wellington – tidal range about one metre but the maximum current flow at Cape Terawhiti is in excess of five knots.
70. The Sounds are affected as follows:
a. The Pelorus Sound is further from this meeting point and therefore more influenced by the Tasman Sea tides so it has a larger range than the Queen Charlotte Sound. For example, at Picton in the Queen Charlotte Sound the spring tide range is 1.5m, at Havelock in the Pelorus Sound the spring tide range is 2.6m.
b. The Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel are best considered as separate areas when looking at tidal effects.
c. The tidal flow in Queen Charlotte Sound inside Dieffenbach Point has a small tidal range and little tidal flow. The outer section of the Queen Charlotte Sound from Dieffenbach Point to the Northern Entrance is affected by the interaction between the Tasman Sea and the Pacific Ocean. When the tide is said to be ebbing in Cook Strait, it flows in through the Northern Entrance and out through Tory
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 12/41
Channel. Conversely, when the tide is flooding it flows into Tory Channel and then flows out through the Northern Entrance.
Marine farms
71. There are 565 marine farms in the Marlborough Sounds5.
72. Mussel farms are generally located in the strip between 50m to 200m out from mean low water. The 50m inshore strip allows for small commercial and recreational craft to move along the coast in the lee of the farms.
73. To my knowledge there has never been a reported navigational accident involving any of these farms and passing vessels. I have reviewed the Harbourmaster’s monthly incident reports since 2005. There are reported incidents regarding mussel farm lights and debris. The NZ King Salmon farm breaking free from its moorings in 2006 features. However, collisions are not something which appear to have occurred.
Navigation in Queen Charlotte Sound
74. Queen Charlotte Sound runs south west to north east before joining Cook Strait. The town of Picton lies near the head of the Sound. Picton, and neighbouring Waikawa Bay are where the majority of recreational vessels are moored. Picton Harbour, and the adjoining Shakespeare Bay is where the larger ships berth. It is a base for the smaller commercial fleet..
75. Most of the traffic in the Sounds would occur in the comparatively sheltered waters between the Grove Arm west of Picton and Blumine Island to the north. Arapawa Island divides Queen Charlotte Sound from Tory Channel. Dieffenbach Point marks the divergence of the Channel and the main body of the Queen Charlotte Sound. A significant number of holiday homes are located on the northern side of Queen Charlotte Sound.
76. The comparatively open area of the Queen Charlotte Sound presents little difficulty in terms of navigation. The unmarked (no buoy or beacon) Perano Shoal is the only real danger, but that is well clear of the normal ferry tracks and is deep enough that most pleasure vessels can navigate over the top of it (4.6m).
77. The area is well lit in terms of navigational lights.
78. This area, like the rest of the Sounds is, because of its topography, radar conspicuous.
79. It is subject to, like the rest of the Sounds, periods of heavy rain and storm force winds. Visibility is sometimes impaired by fog but not as much as the Pelorus Sound. Tides are as previously described.
80. There are few mussel farms in Queen Charlotte Sound. Queen Charlotte College, the high school in Picton has had a small mussel farm in Shakespeare Bay. There are
5 Marine Farming Association Inc. NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 13/41
mussel farms in East Bay, Arapawa Island. NZ King Salmon has a salmon farm at Ruakaka Bay and in East Bay.
81. Users of the inner Sounds includes:
a. Ferry traffic;
b. Log ships using Shakespeare Bay/Northern Entrance;
c. Cruise ships using the Northern Entrance;
d. Motorised barges;
e. Commercial passenger operators;
f. Recreational powered vessels;
g. Yachts, local and visiting, super yachts included. There are regular yacht races conducted in Queen Charlotte Sound;
h. Small recreational craft including canoes and so-called ‘wet bikes’;
i. Recreational line fishing and scallop dredging;
j. Seasonal trawlers using Picton as a discharge port.
Navigation in Tory Channel
82. Tory Channel was originally a valley which drained from its headwaters near what is now the entrance into the Queen Charlotte Sound6. Because of this, the channel narrows and gets progressively shallower towards the seaward end. For this reason the current flows become gradually stronger towards the outer entrance and accelerates significantly over the old saddle at the entrance itself.
83. Tory Channel entrance is an area where currents of up to 6 knots are experienced and where the currents follow the curve of the channel for the most part but both the flood and the ebb tide flows across the line of the leading lights at the entrance.
84. On occasion, winds of 80 knots may be experienced in the area and in South Easterly conditions there may be large swells associated with the ebb (outward) tide flow.
85. The entrance, although 500m across, is still comparatively narrow and strictly one way traffic under the rules of the Controlled Navigation Zone. When small vessels are transiting the entrance at the same time as a ship there is often radio communication between the vessels.
6 Stevens G.R. “Rugged Landscape: the Geology of Central New Zealand” 1974, A.H.& A.W. Reid Ltd, Wellington at page 254-255. NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 14/41
Tory Channel Controlled Navigation Zone
Tory Channel Reporting Arc
The line that vessels enter and leave Tory Channel on.
86. The above chart extract shows the Tory Channel Entrance. Of note:
a. The Tory Channel Controlled Navigation Zone is defined as an area within the arc of a radius of 0.6 nautical miles centred on the point that intersects the line of the leading lights and aligned between East Head and West Head lights (the arc indicated by the yellow line);
b. The Tory Channel Reporting Arc is the point 3.8 nautical miles from the line between the East Head and West Head lights intersected by the leads line (the arc indicated by the blue line);
c. The pilotage limit is 3.6 nautical miles (the arc indicated by the green line);
d. The term ‘on the leads” is when the leading lights are in transit when viewed from the vessel on this line (ie when the leading lights are in line when viewed from the incoming vessel)
87. The current reporting rules are as follows:
a. All inbound vessels, on the arrival at the Tory Channel Reporting Arc are to transmit a message to ‘all ships’ on VHF channel 19 giving the expected time of arrival for entering the Tory Channel Controlled Navigation Zone. Note the broadcast made on VHF channel 19 may also be transmitted on VHF channel 16 and 63;
b. All outbound vessels, when passing a line between Motukina Point light and Te Uira-Karapa East Point light are to transmit a message to ‘all ships’ on VHF channel 19 giving the expected time of arrival for entering the Tory Channel
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 15/41
Controlled Navigation Zone. The broadcast made on VHF channel 19 may also be transmitted on VHF channels 16 and 63;
c. Only one vessel of 350 gross tonnage or more is permitted to navigate in a Controlled Navigation Zone at any one time. All vessels over 350 gross tonnage require a pilot or pilot exempt master7;
d. At all times a vessel less than 500 gross tonnage must give way to a ferry of greater than 500 gross tonnage, irrespective of whether or not the smaller vessel is under sail. This applies not only to the Tory Channel Entrance but everywhere in the Sounds.
88. It follows from that description that the Tory Channel Entrance can be, on occasions, a difficult channel to navigate.
89. The remainder of Tory Channel is classified as a narrow channel. It is the route of regular ferry traffic. The passage plans for those ferries are addressed under the relevant heading below.
90. When in the Channel itself, the collision rules require vessels to keep as near to the outer limit of the channel on its starboard side as is safe and practicable (rule 22.9).
91. My experience is that these regulations are often not complied with. However, there are fortunately few incidents which cause safety concerns.
92. Tory Channel contains within it a number of large bays including Oyster Bay and Onapuha Bay. The coastline is such that smaller boats often take refuge in the embayments from ferries if required.
Pelorus Sound
93. The Pelorus Sound has only recently become a gazetted pilotage area. The pilotage limits means all those waters contained within Pelorus Sound having as their seaward boundary in the north as a straight line drawn in a direction of 353o (T) from the high water mark at Alligator Head to the high water mark at Sentinel Rock thence in a direction of 277o (T) to the high water mark at Bonne Point, D’Urville Island8.
94. The navigational lighting in the Pelorus Sound, particularly, has been much improved over the years. With the advent of radar tailored for the small vessel market, GPS and electronic charts etc., no longer do we hear of vessels getting lost in the Pelorus Sound.
95. However, logs and trees washed down the Pelorus and Kaituna Rivers during floods are still a danger, particularly during subsequent spring tides. Vessels are now able to
7 Maritime Rules Part 90. Tory Channel is defined as “All that area of water within Tory Channel bound at the seaward limit by the arc of a circle, radius 3.5 miles, centred on West Head Light (41°12.8’S, 174°18.9’E) and south of a line from Dieffenbach Point in a direction 090 degrees true to the shore of Arapawa Island at the western end of Tory Channel.” 8Marlborough District Council Navigation Bylaw 2009 schedule 1, 1.2.3, page 33. NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 16/41
navigate at all times and at greater speeds so it can be argued that this debris is now a greater danger than before.
96. The shallow nature of the head of the Pelorus Sound is seen by many navigators as a real deterrent to navigating in this area. Because of the soft nature of the sand and mud, the real danger is in hitting one of the many logs etc. that have come fast on the bottom.
97. In years gone by vessels operating in this area navigated at night with skippers utilizing their intimate knowledge of the outlines of the hills against the sky and using the boat’s wash on the nearby beach or shoreline in the absence of any navigational lights. Nowadays, vessels use radar and GPS and the many navigational lights. In fog, navigation was possible but nowadays with increased traffic makes radar highly desirable.
98. My early experience of navigation in fog in the Pelorus Sound was as follows. We only travelled in daylight. Compasses and charts were not used. In the upper reaches of Pelorus Sounds navigation was on the basis of a detailed knowledge of the shoreline including the relative positions of shoreline beacons and snags (trees or logs fast on the banks) then travelling from one to the next and with the certain knowledge that the fog takes on a darker hue as land is approached, then maintaining a sharp look out for it until it actually appears. In those days, there were few who ventured out in those conditions and with the slow speeds of the vessels involved there was little risk of collision.
99. The Pelorus Sound gets progressively wider towards the entrance and deeper in a series of terraces, at Black Point, Turn Point and Tawhero Point, as the amount of water moving increases towards the entrance, there is consequently a reasonably even flow rate experienced throughout the Pelorus Sounds.
100. Spring tides when flowing against the wind do build up some large seas in the Pelorus.
101. The Kenepuru Sound does not have much tide flow generally except right at the Entrance.
102. The Pelorus Sound has more small commercial marine farming traffic than the Queen Charlotte. The Pelorus Sound is a much less popular area for sailing due to the gusty nature of the winds and the shallow upper reaches, and has generally much less recreational traffic than the Queen Charlotte Sound.
Port Gore
103. Port Gore is a large Bay between Cape Jackson and Cape Lambert and is about 2.5 nautical miles wide and 5.5 nautical miles to the head of the Bay. For the most part, Port Gore is open to all winds and is an uncomfortable place for cruising boats to anchor in bad weather. Port Gore is the resting place of the 170m Soviet luxury cruise liner, the Mikhail Lermontov, which sank on 16 February 1986 as a result of attempting to navigate the narrow passage between Cape Jackson and the lighthouse rock.
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 17/41
104. Chapter 9 of the Cruising Guide addresses the sector from Cape Jackson to Pelorus Sound. The stretch of water is described as “naturally exposed to all winds and can represent quite a hurdle to boat users.”
105. To get to Port Gore from Queen Charlotte Sound you must pass around Cape Jackson. The Cruising Guide states in respect of Cape Jackson:
“This Cape marks the Northern Entrance to Queen Charlotte Sound. The Cape is approximately 100 metres high and the area is fringed with rocks close to the shore. About 600 metres out from the Cape is the old lighthouse standing on a sunken rock. There are rocks beneath the surface to the north- north-east and south of the lighthouse. The passage between the lighthouse and the Cape is clear for cruising boats, apart from the rock near the lighthouse. This passage often has tide rips and over falls and generally to avoid these it is better to keep nearer to the land, than to the lighthouse. There are strong tidal streams through this passage and to the seaward side of the lighthouse. These often run up to four knots, and set to the north-west with the incoming tide, and to the south-east with the outgoing tide.
Three quarters of a mile to the north-east of the lighthouse is Walker Rock which is always above the surface. To the east and the west are outlying rocks, which are dangerous to all boats. Walker Rock should be given a clearance of at least 100 metres. The passage between Walker Rock and the lighthouse has strong tide rips and weed and is only recommended in settled conditions. If the passage between the Cape and the lighthouse is not passable it can be better to travel well out round Walker Rock. This area should be avoided in bad weather conditions.”
106. The NZ Pilot advises there are anchorages in Port Gore and these were used in the distant past by small coastal vessels waiting for the Cook Strait weather to improve. The coastal fleet is now almost non-existent and those vessels that do exist nowadays have sufficient power to handle the weather. I believe that the Pilot description was written with
vessels such as the Vesper in mind. Specifically, the NZ Pilot records the following anchorages:
a. “About 3½ miles SW of Cape Jackson and 5 cables offshore, in a depth of 20m, grey mud.”
b. “In Melville Cove (41º02’.8S 174º10’.4E), in a depth of 22m, with good shelter.”
c. “In the South East corner, about 2½ cables offshore, in a depth of 2m, good holding ground.”
107. The stretch of water between Alligator Head and Cape Lambert is very exposed.
108. The weather conditions in Port Gore are Cook Strait weather conditions. Typical conditions might be 35 – 50 knot winds even when there is little to no wind in Picton. A good indication of the wind conditions in Port Gore is obtained from the Brothers Island
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 18/41
meteorological reporting station. Therefore, any structure must be capable of withstanding extreme winds and the effect of two nautical miles of fetch, with winds from the southeast.
109. There is very little boat traffic in Port Gore. I have spoken to one commercial fishing skipper who operates out of Nelson and spends several months of the year trawling in Cook Strait. Port Gore is en route. He states that in the last twenty years he may have anchored there just once. Such vessels usually anchor in Tory Channel to wait for an improvement in the weather.
Navigation and salmon farms
Commercial vessels over 500 gross tonnage within the designated Pilotage Area
110. All vessels over 500 gross tonnage (except within Tory Channel where the limit is 350 gross tonnage)9 operating within the Pilotage limits (defined by the Marlborough District Council Navigation Bylaw 2009 and Maritime Rules Part 90) are required to be navigated by a pilot or by a master exempt from that requirement. To become a pilot or exempt master a written and oral examination must be completed successfully to demonstrate that the candidate has the detailed navigational knowledge of the area required to fulfil the role.
111. It follows that all large commercial vessels will be piloted by a master or pilot experienced in the waters of the Queen Charlotte and Pelorus Sounds.
112. Large vessel commercial traffic is currently limited to Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel. There are currently no pilot licences issued for the Pelorus Sound, however, there is the intention to run small cruise ships into the area in the future. Queen Charlotte Sound has log ship and large cruise ship traffic which uses the Northern Entrance exclusively. Small cruise ships have asked in the past to use Tory Channel to exit, but have not actually used it to my knowledge.
113. Fishing vessels, currently two of which are over 500 gross tonnage, use Picton as a discharge port and use both the Northern Entrance and Tory Channel.
114. There are two companies which operate ferries between Wellington and Picton: Interislander and Strait Shipping (three Interislander vessels, two Strait Shipping vessels, in total completing 24 crossing on each week day). Interislander has as part of its management system “Passage Plans” approved by the relevant authorities. While not being identical with those of Strait Shipping, there is commonality particularly in regard to the actual tracks through Tory Channel and Queen Charlotte Sound. Such plans must fit within the rules prescribed by the Harbourmaster, who has specified, for example, minimum passing distances off the relevant headlands.
9 Maritime Rules Part 90 NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 19/41
115. The passage plans have tracks which are normally followed unless circumstances render deviation necessary. Interislander Bridge Teams set the allowable cross track error in the electronic navigation systems at between 10m and 100m depending on the area of operation along the route.
116. It should be stressed that these tracks are only intended tracks. There are many reasons for deviating from the intended track.
117. Every master of a ship of less than 500 gross tonnage must not allow his or her vessel to impede the navigation of any vessel of 500 gross tonnage or more if the vessels are operating in the designated Pilotage areas. In addition, a moving prohibited zone extends 500m ahead and 50m on each side and continues at such width to 50m astern of a vessel of 500 gross tonnage or greater, when that vessel is within the Pilotage area.
118. There is no suggestion from the large vessel community that existing salmon farms are a hindrance to shipping in the Marlborough Sounds. The closest salmon farms to large vessels are the Clay Point and Te Pangu farms in Tory Channel. Both those farms are highly visible on radar. The farms make good radar targets even in circumstances where rain masks surrounding land masses.
119. While master of the Aratere, I have measured the distance to the Clay Point farm structure by radar while navigating along Interislander designated inward track (cross track error 0m). At this time the range (distance) to the structure measured 0.17 nautical miles (this equals 315m).
120. On this basis I conclude that, in principle, there can be no navigational reason why salmon farms cannot be placed in Tory Channel provided that they are at least 315m from the standard ferry track. I recommend further conditions be placed on such farms which I will detail below.
121. The Guidelines for Aquaculture Management Areas and Marine Farms published by Maritime New Zealand in December 2005 are relevant in this context. The guidelines note the risk of incorrect positioning of marine farms can increase their potential as a navigation hazard, both through their geographic positioning with regard to other users of marine areas and their physical positioning and size with respect to currents and sea states.
122. Chapter 5.2 deals with positional factors. The guide suggests that Aquaculture Management Areas (AMAs) be kept clear of recognised navigational routes, navigational bottlenecks and port approaches. It goes on to note the various ‘stakeholders’ in the coastal marine areas. The document states:
“5.2.3 The separation distance, or safety buffer, between an AMA and a recognised navigational route will need to take into account such considerations as the size and type of vessels using the route, manoeuvring area, the layout of the area such
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 20/41
as bay, channel or open water, likely divergence from a set course and prevailing currents and wind.
5.2.4 Certain areas, such as within enclosed bays adjacent to recognised navigational route, may be safe positions for AMAs, whilst an area some distance from a recognised navigational route in open water may be considered a hazard. Thus the safe separation distance is best judged by consultation with Maritime New Zealand directly.
5.2.5 As minimum figures, offshore marine farms shall not be located within 1000 metres of any recognised navigational route and inshore marine farms shall not be located within 500 metres of any recognised navigational route.”
123. The document goes on to define onshore farms as farms within 200m of shore and offshore farms as more than 200m from shore
124. These recommendations may be suitable for a general case. Specifying 1000m from an offshore farm is reasonable in the context of the offshore farms as they exist in, for example, Hawkes Bay and the Bay of Plenty. There is a difference between a farm extending beyond the 200m line in the Sounds and a farm out in open water. This open water area is where, for example, oil tankers, such as the ones that I was on, are required now by law to stay five nautical miles from any danger, such as these. There should be a clear distinction drawn between the two different types of so called “offshore” farms.
125. The guidelines are focused on mussel farms not salmon farms. The recommended conditions talk of backbones: a feature of modern mussel culture. In my view the guidelines are not anticipating a steel structure with the properties of a vessel.
126. There will be staff permanently in the vicinity of these structures. An incident will be attended to immediately on a salmon farm. This can be contrasted with a mussel farm where there is no automatic monitoring and no systematic way of telling if it is becoming a hazard to navigation.
127. While I have considered the Guidelines for Aquaculture Management Areas and Marine Farms, I have concluded that the minimum figures set out in that document do not apply to salmon farms in the Marlborough Sounds.
Commercial small boats
128. During the hoki season there is an influx of smaller fishing vessels using the Tory Channel route to discharge at Picton. There are now not as many as there used to be, currently about 10. Discharge frequency depends on how successful the fishing, usually every one to two days. There are occasions where fishing vessels transiting the area from Nelson will use the Northern Entrance/Tory Channel route to Cook Strait.
129. The vessels involved in servicing the marine farming activities in the Sounds make up perhaps the largest other single user group, particularly in the Pelorus Sound.
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 21/41
130. Other commercial users are the passenger operators (water taxis and sightseeing tour boats) and the logging/general barges.
131. As at December 2004 there were 153 commercial marina berths in the Marlborough Sounds, split between Picton (61), Waikawa (38) and Havelock (54)10. 150 light commercial shipping movements were estimated11. 168 commercial vessels are estimated to be based in Marlborough12.
132. The standard of seamanship from these operators is generally high. Provided that a farm is appropriately sited, I conclude that a salmon farm will not pose any difficulty for a commercial small boat operator.
Recreational small boats
133. As at December 2004 there were 1,129 recreational marina berths in the Marlborough Sounds, split between Picton (194), Waikawa (618) and Havelock (317)13. 38,500 recreational shipping movements were estimated14. 1,976 recreational vessels are estimated to be based in Marlborough15. During the summer and particularly at weekends the trailer parking areas will fill up with boat trailers.
134. Scheduled yacht races are organised from Waikawa Bay Yacht Club and there are also yacht races from Wellington to Picton via Tory Channel.
135. Boats are available to charter from Havelock for the Pelorus Sound and Waikawa Bay for the Queen Charlotte Sound. Charter boat companies give their clients briefings about the area and where they are intending to go and if they are satisfied the client knows what they are doing they can take the vessel out into the Sound for the agreed number of days. No qualifications are required to charter a vessel.
136. On an otherwise calm day in the inner Pelorus there can be a constant sea generated by the wakes of passing boats. In the Queen Charlotte on a normal day we will sometimes count the vessels in sight at any one time and often that number exceeds 15. On occasion, at peak times, many more.
137. In Tory Channel, I estimate that there is normally at least one small vessel in view during the day at any one time. Obviously, these observations vary greatly.
138. The Marlborough Sounds are full of hazards including a highly indented landform, shallow areas and rocks which would be unexpected if navigating by landforms alone, large interisland vessels navigating in a narrow channel, unpredictable and often gale force winds caused by the topography and proximity to Cook Strait among others. In order to
10 Farley, P., “Marlborough District Council: Review of Harbour Control Services”, July 2005, p19 11 Farley, P., “Marlborough District Council: Review of Harbour Control Services”, July 2005, p19. An arrival and departure is recorded as two shipping movements. 12 Farley, P., “Marlborough District Council: Review of Harbour Control Services”, July 2005, p20 13 Farley, P., “Marlborough District Council: Review of Harbour Control Services”, July 2005, p19 14 Farley, P., “Marlborough District Council: Review of Harbour Control Services”, July 2005, p19. An arrival and departure is recorded as two shipping movements. 15 Farley, P., “Marlborough District Council: Review of Harbour Control Services”, July 2005, p20 NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 22/41
get to the outer Sounds where the proposed farms are located, a boat operator will have needed to navigate past more complex obstructions than a salmon farm.
139. Navigation in confined channels is required for all vessels in and out of Havelock at low tide. Havelock Channel is narrow and winding. Between Pull `n be Damned Point and Cullens Point the Channel Narrows to less than 50m. Cullens Point is a blind corner. Vessels pass often with as little as five metres space between them. At night inward vessels rounding Cullens Point may not see an outward vessel because its navigation lights may blend into the background lights of Havelock. The nautical term for this is back scatter. The Channel adjacent to Pull `n be Damned Point and Cullen Point is hard against the rocky shore with deep water right up to the shore.
140. Tory Channel requires small craft to navigate inshore of the ferry tracks. Compared to some of the hazards, the farms are conspicuous.
141. It has traditionally been acceptable for marine farms to be in a band between 50 and 200m from mean low water springs. The proposed farms will all be at least 100m from mean low water springs. This distance (the length of a rugby field from try line to try line) is an adequate distance for small vessels to pass between the shore and land, subject to any site specific factors which need to be considered.
142. The danger to navigation is the net pens themselves and the area immediately adjacent to those net pens owing to the anchor lines. I have viewed the cross-sections prepared by NZ King Salmon’s engineers, OCEL. Those documents demonstrate that at a point from four or five metres away from the salmon net pens, the anchor ropes will be at a depth that do not interfere with navigation of small vessels. Generally, navigators give obstructions in the water an acceptable safety margin. Operators of service vessels moor alongside farms unhindered by the presence of anchor lines.
Collisions between vessels and marine farms
143. As previously stated, to my knowledge there has never been a reported collision between a vessel and a marine farm in the Marlborough Sounds. In my experience the vast majority of operators in this area can be said to be competent.
144. However, accidents will happen and are normally the result of an unfortunate combination of events and seldom just one factor, so occasionally, even the most experienced and competent operator may, unfortunately, become involved in an incident. It is also true that the only requirement needed to operate a pleasure vessel is the ability to obtain the vessel.
145. In the context of this report it is not possible for me to assert that there will not be occasions where a vessel may collide with a salmon farm structure. There are many
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 23/41
examples of small vessels being involved in incidents such as collisions although not with a marine farm to date.16
146. In Havelock, for example two vessels have hit the end of the eastern mole, one operator requiring hospital treatment from that impact. The mole is only a few metres across, surmounted by a white post and navigation light, and nearer to sea level a large sign, saying 3 knots.
147. One morning the Aratere emerged from a dense fog bank (with an estimated visibility of 50m) which lay between Arrowsmith and Ruaomoko Points. A small open runabout passed close down our starboard side and disappeared into the fog at a speed of about 30 knots.
148. Technically the vessel was on the wrong side of the channel, but this is a common small craft track. The vessel was about 100m from the shore, in contravention of the 200m rule. The vessel was visible on radar as it approached the ferry and rounded the corner.
149. Had the ferry still been in the fog bank, and had this small open runabout been 200m off shore (albeit on the wrong side of the channel) then the ferry, painted white,would have been so close as to have filled his field of vision and probably our bow wave and blue boot topping would have been his first warning of our presence, apart from our fog signals.
150. Both vessels could not have stopped in time. The relative speed was about 25m/s at first sighting say 50m: two seconds to impact.
151. The reality of the situation is that the small local runabout keeping close to the shore knew that there was no risk of collision with a ferry. However the risk of collision with other small vessels who may have been in his vicinity remains. When such operators are in the area, it is difficult to imagine how there are not more accidents resulting.
152. The proposed farms will be conspicuous, visually and by radar and will be well lit and therefore pose little risk of collision for the mariner maintaining situational awareness.
153. In the event of a small vessel colliding with one of these structures, I cannot see how under these circumstances, any apportionment of blame could be attached to the farm in question.
Interaction between vessels and salmon farms
154. During the day, salmon farms are obvious to navigators. The farms have the approximate shape of a large vessel and are similarly conspicuous. Properly lit, the farms are also sufficiently obvious at night. A competent navigator maintaining a look out and travelling at a safe speed will not collide with a farm.
16 Riding, J., “Marlborough Sounds Harbour: Navigational Risk Assessment” April 2005. Marico Marine NZ Ltd. Revised 2009. NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 24/41
155. The effect of a salmon farm on navigation goes beyond the question of whether or not a navigator will hit the salmon farm.
156. The Marlborough District Council has included in its navigation bylaw17 a rule requiring vessels to reduce their ‘through the water’ speed to 5 knots when 200m from a structure (defined to include a marine farm) (clause 3.2.1(b)). There are limited exceptions for certain areas, classes of vessels and circumstances (clause 3.2.6). The same bylaw requires navigators to slow to five knots within 50m from an anchored vessel, raft or person in the water (clause 3.2.1(a)). A salmon farm is both a structure and a raft.
157. The size of a displacement vessel’s wash is a function of its speed through the water. I expect wash from passing vessels will have no effect on the structures.
158. In theory:
a. There will be enhanced safety around marine farms due to slow speeds;
b. The area 200m from a marine farm will become an exclusion area due to navigators avoiding the area to avoid reducing speed.
159. If the bylaw was followed it would have that effect. With the only requirement to navigate a pleasure craft in the Sounds being that one can obtain a boat, knowledge of the rules and regulations which apply to boating is variable. Practice by those who know the rules is also variable.
160. I have considered the possibility that mariners would comply with the 200m rule by avoiding the farm by the full 200m and therefore pushing them closer to the path of the ferry. In doing this they would avoid the need to slow down pursuant to the rule. However, Tory Channel is a narrow channel. Maritime Rule 22.9 governs vessels within narrow channels and requires vessels to keep as clear to the outer limit of the channel or fairway which lies on its starboard side as is safe and practicable. The Maritime Rules take precedence over local bylaws (s451(7) Maritime Transport Act 1994). This would mean that a mariner, complying with all relevant rules and bylaws, would not alter their course to become closer to the ferry track. Rather, they would slow down for the period of time which was required to pass the farms.
161. It follows that mariners who comply with the bylaws will need to slow down when they are within 200m of the salmon farms (unless one of the exceptions to the bylaw applies). That will be an inconvenience but will have no greater effect
Beneficial effects of the farms on navigational safety
162. From a navigational point of view the salmon farms may produce some beneficial effect where, in an otherwise isolated area, there will be other navigators and boats in the area.
17 Historically harbour boards and local authorities who have been given a grant of control of waters under the Harbours Act 1950 had their own bylaw for the waterways under their control. The Water Recreation Regulations 1979 apply to NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 25/41
Salmon farms will be in a known location and have a known compliment of staff to assist in an emergency.
163. The farms will have first aid qualified staff on board. Amongst the staff there will be competent seafarers.
Navigational issues relating to the proposed sites
Waitata Reach
164. Five farms are proposed in the Waitata Reach, Pelorus Sound. The precise locations are best described by reference to the charts at appendix 1, 2 and 3. In brief:
a. Kaitira is to the north east of Post Office Point;
b. Tapipi is to the north of Tapipi Point;
c. Richmond is to the South of Tapipi Point and is in northern Richmond Bay;
d. Waitata is to the north of Boat Rock Point and, offshore the consented White Horse Rock mussel farm;
e. White Horse Rock is that mussel farm which is sought to be converted into a salmon farm.
165. All five farms are located adjacent to the existing coastline. Three of the farms (Kaitira, Tapipi and Richmond) are on the eastern side of the Waitata Reach. The Waitata Farm and White Horse Rock Farms are on the western side of Waitata Reach.
166. Waitata Reach is a deep passage at the entrance of Pelorus Sound, influenced by the tide. It is located in the outer Pelorus Sound which receives relatively little boat traffic compared with other parts of the Sounds. Waitata Reach does lie on the navigation route between Havelock and Forsyth Bay in the Cook Strait. By the time a mariner is prepared to venture into those regions, they are likely to be reasonably skilled.
167. The Waitata Reach is a series of indented bays. Those bays are typically shallower than the Reach. Many of the headlands leading to Waitata Reach contain noticeable reef structures. Pohenui Reef lies to the south of Richmond Bay. Reef Point lies at the southern entrance of Waitata Bay. Danger Point and Keep Clear Rock lie between Waihinau Bay and Port Ligar. Only one point in the Reach is lit: a lighthouse marks the north eastern end of Maud Island.
168. Waitata Reach is described, beginning at page 121 of the Cruising Guide. It notes:
“This first part of Pelorus Sound lies in a south west/north east direction. Thus it lies across the prevailing winds and usually does not have a large sea. In strong conditions the leeward bays can, however, become dangerous and unsuitable for anchorage. Yachts will generally find it possible to pass through this reach on one tack in NW or SE
all other sea waters and to all navigable lakes and rivers. Many harbour boards made their own bylaws similar to the NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 26/41
conditions. Sea breezes, however, come as a NE wind which means working direct to windward, when trying to leave Pelorus Sound. In bad weather NW winds can be particularly vicious off Waitata Bay and in Apuau Channel.”
169. The Cruising Guide has entries for other bays in the vicinity, specifically:
a. Wynens Bay (page 121);
b. Waihinau Bay (page 124-125);
c. Ketu Bay (page 125);
d. Waitata Bay (page 126);
e. Richmond Bay (page 126-127).
170. I have read those entries but consider that they have less relevance to this report than other passages which I quote.
171. In the chart each farm is marked with an area of moorings and within that an indicative area of structures. Having been shown the structure plan for existing farms, those proposed at Waitata Reach and in situ in other parts of the Sounds, I am confident that commercial boats and recreational boats will be able to navigate almost adjacent to all structures. This is the case at the existing farms. Certainly all small boats will be able to navigate between the shore and the structures of the proposed salmon farm. Vessels may be required to alter their course as a result of the farm being present. The various routes for transiting Waitata Reach can be identified from the chart in appendix 3. That would be the same as a circumstance where there was a vessel in the location of the proposed farms. I do not anticipate any substantial difficulties arising from this.
172. From the point of view of navigational safety, the clearance between the proposed farm structures and the existing marine farms and land formations is quite adequate. I refer to the charts in appendix 1 and 2. The closest those farms will be to the shore will be in the order of 175m. This ought to pose no difficulty whatsoever.
173. The exceptions are the Waitata Farms and White Horse Rock. Waitata Farm has an existing mussel farm inshore. That mussel farm is proposed to be the White Horse Rock Salmon Farm. With both present, there would be approximately 70m of sea room on the inside of the White Horse Rock Farm. This is a greater amount of clearance than if the mussel farm was present given that surface structures on mussel farms generally occupy the area of the permit with the exception of the space needed for the anchor warps which run parallel to the shore. Large vessels, or vessels which wish to travel at speed would choose to travel in the main part of the Reach. Vessels which are prepared to reduce their speed will be able to navigate inshore of the farms.
regulations to ensure as far as possible that there is uniformity throughout the country NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 27/41
174. For yachts under sail, the proposed location is unlikely to cause navigational issues. If the wind is blowing from the North West or South East (the prevailing winds) the yacht will either be close hauled or on a reach and will be able to navigate in the direction of the main channel unimpeded. If the wind is blowing in the direct line of travel then a yacht will need to tack across the channel. The farms may restrict the amount of room available for tacking. However, sailors tend to prefer remaining in the middle of the channel in the Marlborough Sounds. Winds become unpredictable close to shore. Typically, near shore, winds are lighter than those in the middle of the channel. However, depending on the topography, williwaws (or a sudden blast of wind descending from a mountainous coast to the sea) can form which can put a yacht at risk if it is inappropriately rigged.
175. These farm applications are away from any point of regular use such as jetties, moorings and ski lanes. From a navigational perspective and while considering risk of collision, these farms are no different to a ship at anchor. I go into this in more details under the heading Buoyage and Lighting below.
176. Tides in Waitata Reach are considerably less than in Tory Channel. According to the tidal diamond information the biggest flow is less than one knot.
177. As previously noted, the mountains of the southern part of the North Island and the northern part of the South Island in their relative positions causes a funnelling effect through the Cook Strait region with consequent increase in wind speed. This land form also tends to cause the gale force winds to blow through the area in a north to north westerly and south to south easterly winds. In the Marlborough Sounds the gale force winds from the north still have a westerly component as they blow across the top of the South Island, prior to being deflected by one of the ranges of the southern North Island. When the forecast is for northerly winds, in the Pelorus Sound there may be little or no wind, particularly in the upper reaches of the Sound. In the outer parts the predominating northerly wind directions will blow more or less across Waitata Reach.
178. I expect these farms to experience some strong winds from the northwest and sou- southeast quarters. However, there is insufficient searoom for any significant fetch to be generated. This is in contrast to the sea conditions which may be experienced nearby, along the northern coast, in the vicinity of Paparoa, Harding Point and Clay Point.
179. In summary, I expect these sites to be subject to storm force, squally winds on occasions. They will be subject to moderate to rough locally generated seas, but the area cannot be termed “open coast”.
180. Appropriately lit, the proposed farms will simply be another element to navigate around in the Marlborough Sounds. Provided that the farms are appropriately lit, the farms will be visible both day and night. Small craft will be able to navigate between the farm and the shore as well as the farms themselves. Larger craft may well be capable of doing this as well but may prefer to remain in the central channel.
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 28/41
181. The most that might be said is that the farms will be an additional element within the Sounds which need to be navigated around.
Papatua
182. The site of the Papatua Farm is located in Pig Bay off Papatua Point, south of the promontory leading to Cape Lambert and north of the promontory which forms the eastern boundary of Melville Cove. The site is marked on the charts at appendix 4 and 5.
183. Papatua does not lie on any recognised navigation route. It is not within any gazetted Pilotage area. Port Gore is not a well frequented place. Marine farming vessels, fishing vessels, and recreational diving on the Mikhail Lermontov do visit. The natural conditions to be encountered in getting to Port Gore discourage all but experienced navigators.
184. I have not done a survey myself in terms of actual numbers. I suspect there would be one vessel every few days visiting the mussel farms. I am told that 500 dives occur on the Mikhail Lermontov in any given year18. The area is also used for fishing, particularly in the near shore area of Pig Bay. Historically, few trips were made to this area to fish.19 In more recent times the popularity of Port Gore as a fishing destination has been enhanced because it was not subject to the Blue Cod fishing ban which existed between October 2008 and 1 April 2011. With the relaxation of the fishing ban in the Marlborough Sounds, I expect there to be less fishing in Port Gore than there might have been during the Blue Cod fishing ban.
185. The site of Papatua Farm is not a recommended anchorage. The Cruising Guide relevantly says:
“From Hunia Point to Cape Lambert there are rocks fringing the shore with some off lying dangers. A clearance of 40 metres should be given.
186. All competent mariners would be able to navigate between the shore and the proposed structures. The calculated distances from the shore to the cage area show a minimum of 313m, although the chart at appendix 4 shows significant areas of foul ground which needs to be approached cautiously. The actual distance is likely to be 250m of safe navigation room.
187. The positions noted in the Pilot are well clear of this proposed farm site (refer appendix 5).
188. Vessels accessing Port Gore from the Pelorus Sound side round Cape Lambert, follow the coast down to Okina and then cross Pig Bay to Hunia Point if heading for Melville Cove. This is as close as any vessel entering Port Gore is likely to get to this site.
18 Refer Tourism and Recreational Assessment paragraph 5.2.29 19 1.2% of fishing trips in the Marlborough Sounds targeted the Port Gore/Waitui Bay area from Bell, J.D., “Marlborough Sounds Recreational Fishing Survey”, 1998. Waitui Bay was historically more popular than Port Gore. NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 29/41
189. Relevant commercial traffic would be to marine farms situated from Tinui/Melville Cove eastward towards Tunnel Bay and Pig Bay. Any vessel working these farms will not be endangered or even inconvenienced by the presence of the salmon farms to seaward.
190. There are some residents in Port Gore but they are at Tinui and in the south east corner, some miles from this application.
191. There is some traffic between Paremata and Pelorus Sound. These vessels may, on occasion, deviate into Port Gore.
192. Diving expeditions on Mikhail Lermontov, are normally accessing the site via Cape Jackson and well clear of this site.
193. Charter fishing around the shoreline target species such as cod. These fish are close in shore where there is foul ground. When engaged in this type of fishing, the norm is to slowly work along the coast. From a navigational point of view this proposed farm will not have any adverse effect on charter fishing. The Marlborough Sounds Recreational Fishing Survey 1998 gives 29 trips total for the year but this number also includes Waitui Bay, which used to be a more popular destination
194. In the case of the Mikhail Lermontov, the wreck is 1.5 nautical miles from the edge of the mooring area.
195. Provided that the farm can be constructed such that it will withstand the weather conditions, then this site is ideal because it is so far removed from any other navigational activity which may conflict.
Ngamahau
196. Ngamahau farm is located in Tory Channel. It is adjacent to the short section of coast which lies between Deep Bay and Ngamahau Bay, Arapawa Island. The farm’s position is shown on the charts set out in appendix 6 and 7.
197. The farm is adjacent to the inward route of the Cook Strait ferries as per the approved Interislander Passage Plans. The farm lies approximately 330m westward of the point on the Interislander inward track where there is a course change of about 15º to port and is, therefore, on the outside of the turn as shown on the chart in appendix 6. However, an inward vessel would therefore pass closer if misjudging the turn. Outward vessels pass close north of a shelving foreshore off the northern point of the Te Rua Bay. The prudent navigator will pass this reef either on or slightly north of the track.
198. The existing farm structure at Clay Point is 315m from the Interislander inward track as measured by radar. The farm at Clay Point does not pose any inconvenience to the ferry traffic that I am aware of. The proposed new farm at Ngamahau will have a greater passing distance
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 30/41
199. On that basis the farm at Ngamahau must be considered acceptable from a navigational point of view.
200. In order for a ferry or other large vessel to become dangerously close to the farm it would have to be initially north of the inward track. At the point of the collision it would be approximately one minute from going ashore on the south point at the entrance to Deep Bay. Maximum draught of ships using Tory Channel is six metres. This means that the anchor cables will not present a danger to the ship even if the ship happens to be within the boundaries of the actual farm.
201. Recently tidal surveys have been carried out in Tory Channel as part of the mooring requirement calculation. Cawthron, as part of their scientific investigations aside, have measured current speeds at the Ngamahau site. The currents at the surface are the most relevant for navigation. Cawthron describe the surface currents as ranging between three centimetres per second and 61.5 centimetres per second with an average of 23.0 centimetres per second. In knots that amounts to between .06 knots and 1.2 knots with an average of .45 knots. That range is moderate by Sounds standards.
202. The proximity to the entrance of Tory Channel (see appendix 7) is an obvious risk should the farm at Ngamahau happen to break away from its anchoring system as happened at Te Pangu some time ago.
203. Measures must be taken to give as close to an absolute assurance as possible that this cannot happen again, as the prospect of meeting a drifting out of control salmon farm at the Tory Channel entrance would be a serious situation. However, it is important not to overstate the consequences of the farm breaking away:
a. The existing farms at Te Pangu and Clay Point are little more than one mile further up the channel. Given that any dangerous breakaway will happen at the full ebb, then with the current flow in excess of two knots, the difference of the arrival time of the two farms at Tory Channel entrance is effectively between 20 and 30 minutes.
b. The difference between the Ngamahau Farm and the Controlled Navigation Zone is approximately three nautical miles. If one assumes an average current over that distance of two to three knots (which assumes the salmon farm is being carried free in the ebb and is not in contact with the shore) the time to reach Scraggy Point near the Entrance is approximately 60 minutes. A properly designed emergency procedure will alert all vessels in a much shorter time. The real increase in current speed occurs within the Controlled Navigation Zone as the current passes over what was the ‘saddle’ at the head of the valley and is now the Entrance.
c. The point at which a farm floating free and a ferry would be at significant risk of collision would be between Scraggy Point and East Head. A former master of the Arahura has told me of an incident when the Cook Strait ferry Kent was NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 31/41
encountered in a position off Scraggy Point laying across the Channel, stopped and making no way through the water. A collision was avoided (this is the days before AIS). A farm would only be resident in that dangerous location for 15 minutes.
d. All vessels over 350 gross tonnage transiting Tory Channel will either have a pilot or pilot exempt master on board20. Accordingly, any vessel of that size will have a person on-board highly familiar with detailed and current knowledge of the area.
e. A ship coming from Cook Strait into the Marlborough Sounds through Tory Channel would ideally have five minutes to abort entry through the Entrance. A vessel travelling from the Marlborough Sounds out into Tory Channel could stop in a shorter time again. If emergency procedures are properly executed, it would appear impossible for a farm to be unexpectedly encountered just inside the Entrance;
f. The farm is constantly manned. There is a manned control room with a view over the farm and communication equipment which will enable action to be taken when needed. This is similar to a ship at anchor. The free floating farm would behave similarly to a manned vessel having lost propulsion.
g. Diversion to the Northern Entrance occurs when Tory Channel is closed. Diversion is relatively straightforward up until a mile (five minutes) before the Entrance depending on tide, weather and sea condition.
204. In order for this sort of circumstance to develop into a serious incident, a number of failures will need to occur. The starting point must be good engineering. However, in the event of a mooring failure, even at worst case scenario, there is significant time before significant risks arise.
205. Small vessels will be able to navigate inshore of the proposed farm should they wish to. The minimum distance to shore is approximately 140m to the edge of the cage area (see appendix 6). With care, medium size vessels could also navigate between the farm and shore.
206. Other than the points mentioned above, the site is not impeding access to bays, water-ski lanes or other points of navigational interest.
207. The Cruising Guide contains a brief section on Jacksons Bay to Deep Bay and Deep Bay itself on page 63. It states:
“Jacksons Bay
As in Te Awaiti the whole of this bay is shallow and only about three metres deep. The bottom is a mixture of malodorous sand and mud that grips anchors like glue. The bay is
20 Maritime Rules Part 90 NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 32/41
an excellent anchorage, sheltered from all except E to SE winds and misses most of the ferry wash. There is little depth of water past the wharf at LW.
The bay between Jackson and Te Awaiti has a boatshed, wharf and slipway. Repairs to hulls can be attended to by the local boat builder. At the end of the wharf there is two metres of water. This bay is good holding but exposed to most winds.
Jackson Bay to Deep Bay
The coast here is sheltered in N sector winds only. The ferry wash and lack of any depth to the coves make the area of little use as an anchorage.
Deep Bay
The entrance to this bay is very shallow and blocked by a sand bank extending from the northern shore. There is two and a half metres of water close to the southern side of the entrance but the rest of the entrance is little more than one and a half metres deep. Once into the bay the depth increases to six metres. The head of the bay is good holding and provides shelter from most winds if close to the shore in the north-west corner. Care should be exercised when laying anchors as the bottom is covered with cabbage-like seaweed. A pick anchor is recommended. The anchor should be sharply jerked once laid to ensure it immediately bites down through the weed into the sand. Otherwise it will slide and become fouled with weed.”
208. Occasionally fishing trawlers working Cook Strait will anchor in the vicinity waiting for weather improvement. The proposed farm will not interfere with such practices.
209. Based on the experience with Clay Point, the farm will not pose any impediment to navigation. The only potential issue is one of engineering.
Ruaomoko and Kaitapeha
210. The proposed Ruaomoko and Kaitapeha farms are located at the extreme western end of Arapawa Island. The farms are located in the vicinity of where Tory Channel meets Queen Charlotte Sound. The closest point on the Mainland is Dieffenbach Point. Charts showing farms can be found in appendix 8 and 9. There will be a minimum of approximately 150m from the area where the net pens might be located to the shore. The Kaitapeha Farm is located immediately adjacent to Kaitapeha Point. The Ruaomoko Farm is north of Ruaomoko Point.
211. A reference to Kaitapeha can be found on page 89 of the Cruising Guide:
“Kaitapeha Bay to Umuwheke Bay
These bays are all open to the prevailing NW to N winds but do offer some shelter in E to S winds. Double Bay tends to be a bit gusty in S sector winds. The bay north of Double Bay gives some shelter to SW to W winds.
All of these bays have pleasant beaches and are good picnic spots.”
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 33/41
212. The area around Dieffenbach would seem to be an ideal site for a salmon farm, being in deep water, with good current flow away from any populated area and on the established route of the salmon farm service vessels as they transit between the Ruakaka and Clay/Te Pangu farms.
213. From a navigational point of view the proposed Ruaomoko and Kaitapeha farms are in a complex area. This area includes:
a. Inward and outward bound Cook Strait ferry traffic rounding Dieffenbach Point;
b. Other major shipping movements by log ships and cruise ships transiting to or from Shakespeare Bay/Picton Harbour to the Northern Entrance;
c. Recreational vessels travelling to and from the outer Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel;
d. Recreational Vessels fishing off Dieffenbach Point;
e. Vessels scalloping north west of Dieffenbach Point.
214. This is also a common meeting point for inward and outward ferries, particularly when Aratere, Kaitaki and Santa Regina are all on schedule on their current timetables.
215. From a ferry perspective outward vessels entering Tory Channel from Queen Charlotte Sound and then transiting Tory Channel must, in order to follow the track as laid down in the passage plan, execute the turn with some precision, as Dieffenbach Reef is avoided to starboard, whilst ensuring that the rate of turn is adequate to avoid excessive cross track error, across to the east and towards the path of the inward vessel steering 355º.
216. In the context of the rules, small vessels less than 500 gross tonnage are required to keep out of the ferry’s way. However, often recreational craft will fish in the vicinity of Dieffenbach Reef where they occasionally prevent the ferries from starting their turn to starboard in a timely fashion. (The boats fishing normally move away in good time.)
217. Although I have never seen it happen with an inward vessel in the vicinity, it is common enough to complete the outward Dieffenbach Point turn with about 80m of cross track error, as for whatever reason the vessel would require excessive helm, and consequent passenger discomfort, to be ‘on the track’ at the completion of the turn.
218. In restricted visibility or fog, we travel at a reduced speed as required by the collision rules and make the appropriate sound signals, however, it is still a potentially dangerous situation when two or three vessels pass in this area, in fog.
219. The prescribed track separation is quite adequate in good visibility, but in fog it is always desirable to maximise that distance, with the outward vessel keeping west of the track, once around Dieffenbach Point and the inward vessel keeping to the east of the 355º track.
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 34/41
220. Often for operational reasons it is required for vessels to perform an overtaking manoeuvre between Dieffenbach Point and Allports Island. The full distance between these two points is often required in order to stay within prescribed speed restrictions if they apply to the overtaking vessel.
221. In order that this manoeuvre be completed in a timely fashion and with the observance of good seamanship, the vessel to be overtaken will occasionally offer to move off to the east of the 355º track to allow the overtaking vessel to draw up closer and overtake as soon as possible once the turn around Dieffenbach Point has been completed.
222. Occasionally shipping using the Northern Entrance will transit this area at the same time as ferry traffic.
223. On the particular occasion where this scenario happened to me on Aratere, I recall an inward visiting cruise ship (pilot on board), travelling at about 14 knots inward from the Northern Entrance, approached south of Luke Rock to arrive at exactly the same time as Aratere was due there, with the cruise ship close to our intended track passing south of the rock. At the same time a Strait Shipping ferry was outward bound, such that Aratere would have passed "in the turn" off Dieffenbach, were it not for the presence of the cruise ship. In this situation, the Strait Shipping vessel was unaffected by the presence of Aratere and the cruise ship and followed the prescribed passage plan.
224. Between Aratere and the cruise ship, Aratere was the give way vessel. The cruise ship was required by the rules to maintain course and speed.
225. The presence of the outward Strait Shipping vessel meant that Aratere could not, once clear passage was established, move to the south of her intended track and then overtake the cruise ship (with Aratere’s speed of about 20 knots). Aratere’s options were reduced to slowing down, or moving off to the east, until the way was clear for it to overtake. In fact, Aratere did both, slowing down and altering course to starboard. In order to do this Aratere had to steer 005º.
226. Small vessels transiting the area between Dieffenbach and Ruaomoko will often take the direct route between the two points. If a ferry meets them in this area they occasionally misjudge the ferry’s speed and the amount that the ferry will turn. Occasionally the ferry must take avoiding action, which may necessitate the ferry altering further to starboard.
227. These are the reasons that the location of Ruaomoko farm must allow for a ferry to steer 005º (T). From that track 315m must be allowed for an appropriate safety margin. This margin is shown in the chart at appendix 8.
228. From the point of view of the small commercial and recreational vessel, the Kaitapeha site should not provide any real impediment because it is away from vessels travelling to the bays on the north side of Arapawa Island and also from vessels travelling down Tory Channel (refer chart at appendix 9).
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 35/41
229. Small vessels transiting the area often travel along the coast as far as Dieffenbach, keeping out of the way of larger vessels.
230. They then cross the shipping lanes to the safety of the north coast of Arapawa Island. They will have the option of going north or south of the Kaitapeha farm without being impeded either way.
231. In the event of small vessels wanting certainty in avoiding major shipping the vicinity of this farm could be a good refuge.
232. Boats most affected by the farms will be those which are travelling from Tory Channel towards the Northern Entrance (when transiting in reverse they ought to cross to the other side of Tory Channel and therefore most likely will not be in the vicinity of the farms). There are few boats which travel on this course. The vast majority of vessels in this area are transiting between inner Queen Charlotte Sound and either Tory Channel or outer Queen Charlotte Sound.
233. For those boats which are travelling on the line I have indicated they will need to navigate to avoid the farms. In doing so they would need to navigate either in the at least 315m between the alternate Interislander track and the farm or within 154m being the minimum distance from the farm to shore (refer chart at appendix 8). This will be at an inconvenience at worst. The farm may provide a small boat refuge in storm force north westerly winds by creating an area behind the farms which would be sheltered and provide a location where one could guarantee no ferry traffic.
234. From a shipping point of view I can see no issues relating to the Kaitapeha site. In relation to Ruaomoko, this is a busy corner. However, the site is well clear of large traffic.
Conditions to be Imposed
Notification to Mariners/Education
235. The notice to mariners system is a process whereby mariners are informed of changes which have occurred subsequent to the publication of the printed chart (amongst other things).
236. I recommend that an initial warning is promulgated by a Preliminary Notice to Mariners some weeks beforehand to note change on charts. Closer to the time a Radio Navigation warning will report the notice of intention. Once established Picton Harbour Radio will broadcast a message to all ships. If deemed necessary it will be included in general navigation warnings broadcast on channel 16. At that point a permanent notice will be issued for chart corrections so that the relevant charts will be permanently corrected with the farm’s position.
237. NZ King Salmon could also be part of an education campaign targeting recreational boat users. A campaign could be run during the first month or so of summer, promoting maritime safety. Part of the issues which might be discussed could be the installation of
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 36/41
new farms. Often electronic and paper charts, once purchased, are not corrected. Information must be disseminated through other means.
238. This would be best organised in conjunction with the Harbourmaster.
Buoyage
239. The warp/depth ratio (the angle that the anchor chain descends into the water from the farm to the anchor), is such that there would appear to be no need for associated buoyage.
240. When installing the very first of the mussel farm longline anchors we did buoy them but the practice soon ceased.
241. The same practice used to exist with ships’ anchors but died out a number of years ago.
242. As I believe to be the case with the mussel farm anchors, this practice was to aid recovery, rather than to act as any form of navigational mark.
Restricted visibility
243. The Harbourmaster may consider that the farm should give audible signals during period of restricted visibility (eg fog).
244. The correct signal in restricted visibility for an anchored vessel of more than 100m in length is:
a. Ringing a bell rapidly for about five seconds at intervals of no more than one minute in the forepart of the vessel; and
b. Immediately after ringing the bell, the gong must be sounded rapidly for about five seconds at the after part of the vessel. (Rule 22.35(e));
c. In addition, a vessel at anchor, may sound three blasts of the whistle in succession, namely one short, one prolonged and one short blast to give warning of its position.
245. I have never heard a gong or a bell being sounded as a signal of an anchored vessel in my years of navigation. A significant number of mariners would not know what those signals represented. A passing vessel would not be likely to hear the sound over engine noise or in an enclosed wheelhouse.
246. The only vessels which I have heard sound whistle signals during periods of restricted visibility are the large ships such as the Interislander ferries. Vessels less than 12m in length are not required to carry sound signalling equipment. I have never heard any vessel coming into the port of Havelock sounding a fog signal.
247. If the Harbourmaster was to require fog signals, they could be automated via an electronic circuit. Appendix 3 to Part 22 of the Maritime Rules sets out the specific requirements for such signals.
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 37/41
Lighting
248. When considering lighting for the proposed salmon farms and the minimisation of risk of collision from a navigational perspective, it is useful to consider that these proposed farms are no different to a ship at anchor. The farms will be as well lit as a vessel of commensurate size at anchor. A vessel 100m or more in length must show two anchor lights and all available deck lighting. A vessel less than 100m in length need show only two all-round white lights21. There is good argument that this is inadequate based on the death of a scallop fisherman in Golden Bay when a vessel mistook the single white light on an anchored barge for the stern light of one of the scallop boats ahead of them and then collided with the barge.
249. On the other hand, the proposed lights should not be too bright. There needs to be a clear distinction between primary navigation lights such as that on Clay Point. The nominal range of the lights at Te Uira-Karapa Point and Motukina Point are four miles and the lights at West Head and East Head have a range of eight miles and three miles respectively. In part, the use of a different colour (yellow) as opposed to white, red or green, assists in distinguishing the lights.
250. The Harbourmaster will determine what the appropriate lighting is for these farms prior to the farms being installed. The Harbourmaster undertakes that exercise pursuant to the Maritime Transport Act 1994 and not the Resource Management Act 1991.
251. Previously, on neighbouring farms, the Harbourmaster has required:
a. A yellow light be displayed on the four corners of the farm and in the centre of the longest side;
b. The lights are to be coloured yellow;
c. The lights flash five times every 20 seconds, the length of the flashes is no more than one second. The interval between the flashes is no more than one second;
d. The lights are to have a range of at least one nautical mile;
e. The lights are to be higher than one metre above the surface of the water.
252. From my experience I agree that the salmon farms are appropriately lit if lit in this manner. The Maritime New Zealand Guidelines suggest lights of a range of two nautical miles which would not be excessive. The underwater lighting, while not a navigation aid by design, provides a soft green hue above and is unmistakeable. However, the lighting used by the salmon farm is not sufficiently bright to destroy night vision, a complaint I have about other fishing vessels who light their decks brightly at night. When comparing fishing boats at anchor, with their decks line at night in the area approaching the entrance to Tory
21 Rule 22.30 paraphrased. NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 38/41
Channel and the nearby salmon farm, the lighting on the salmon farm is distinctive and does not adversely affect night vision whereas the fishing boat does.
253. I would recommend an additional feature of the navigation lights that they flash on a synchronised basis. I suggest that the lights be linked wirelessly. In that way, all navigational lighting on a farm will flash simultaneously, allowing the navigator to instantly see the extent of the farm.
254. Synchronised lighting of the beacons on the starboard side of the approach channel into Havelock make the channel beacons very obvious to the navigators.
Engineering
255. All farms need to be engineered so that they do not drag their anchors. This is particularly so for the Ngamahau Farm. The farm must be installed with a generous margin of safety. I am no engineer. I have read the report by NZ King Salmon’s engineer and there are no areas of concern for me arising from that report.
256. I am familiar with the NZ King Salmon farm at Te Pangu losing its moorings in early March 2006. I am lead to believe that the cause of that incident, other than unusually high tides and strong currents was that the fact that a combination of block and screw anchors had been used. I am lead to believe that a complete review of the mooring system was undertaken at that time and that has lead to the moorings which are currently in place. I know of no subsequent incident.
257. The Maritime New Zealand Guidelines refer to a maintenance regime being required. I suggest that a maintenance regime be designed by an appropriately qualified and experienced engineer. I understand that NZ King Salmon has such a regime in place on its existing sites.
258. The risks of a salmon farm drifting needs to be put in context of other potential hazards which exist in Tory Channel: a vessel of any class may lose steerage. I am aware of at least two occasions where propulsive power has been lost, leaving the ferry with only steerage way. I am aware of one incident where complete power has been lost. The Marlborough Express reported on 21 July 2011 that a particular vessel was required to anchor in Tory Channel twice in a month after losing partial propulsive power.
259. I accept that greater risks in other areas do not, of themselves, justify in creating smaller risks. However, the Te Pangu failure (which resulted in the closure of Tory Channel until the situation was under control) and the loss of propulsion on Cook Strait vessels, equally without significant consequences, leads me to the conclusion that provided that cautious engineering is done and an adequate contingency plan are in place, the risks are acceptable.
260. An issue which needs to be considered is the tsunami risk. Tory Channel was closed as a result of the tidal surge caused by the 28 February 2010 earthquake in Chile. The
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 39/41
Harbourmaster closed the Channel on the basis that, because the entrance is narrow, any tidal surge may have caused abnormally large currents there.
261. As it transpired the effect of the tsunami was not significant.
262. When the tsunami resulting from the recent large earthquake in Japan arrived in the area, it caused damage to mussel farms in Croisilles Harbour and in Port Underwood. On this occasion, Tory Channel was not closed. On Aratere I had questioned whether the intention was to close the Channel again on hearing the news of the earthquake. It was not, so we transited at about the time it was due in the area. We neither saw nor heard any effects in Tory Channel. Local fishermen reported nothing sighted.
263. In my opinion, provided sufficient safety factor is built into the mooring system, the risk to navigation can be appropriately minimised.
264. In an event so severe to cause mooring failure, the Channel would be closed anyway.
AIS
265. An AIS system (Automatic Identification System) is a requirement of all vessels over a certain size. Put simply, it is an automatic and frequent transmission of a vessel’s identification and location via radio waves.
266. There are two classes of AIS systems:
a. Class A – AIS products are for ships over 300 or more gross tonnage which voyage internationally and all passenger ships regardless of size;
b. In addition there is a new Class B product for vessels which are not required to carry Class A AIS systems but nevertheless wish to or are required to be local bylaws carry an AIS system.
267. I recommend that the proposed marine farms in and near Tory Channel are fitted with a Class B transponder. The purpose of that transponder would be to identify the location of the farm. If the farm was out of position for whatever reason it could clearly be seen on those large vessels which carry AIS receivers. The Harbourmaster may also be able to locate the farm using shore-based technology.
268. I do not think that the addition of three additional AIS targets locations on our equipment (or five if this requirement was carried across to the existing farms) would create distractions for us. The farms would normally appear in exactly the same position they would be easily recognisable without having to interrogate the target information.
269. This equipment would transmit:
a. The Marine Mobile Service Identity number (a unique identifier for the farm), time, the speed over ground, the course over ground, longitude, latitude and true heading every three minutes (where speed is greater than two knots, this occurs every 30 seconds);
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 40/41
b. The Marine Mobile Service Identity number, the name of the farm, a description of the farm, its call signs, dimensions to the nearest metre and equipment vendor identification every six minutes.
Emergency Procedures
270. Particularly in respect of the Ngamahau Farm, but potentially for the other farms as well, I would recommend NZ King Salmon have a contingency plan in place to deal with the circumstance where the farm comes loose of its moorings.
271. The plan should be prepared in consultation with the Harbourmaster and should include:
a. An immediate broadcast on channel 19 to alert ferries in the vicinity;
b. The notification of the Harbourmaster part of whose response will likely be to issue a navigation warning;
c. An emergency call to tug operators to help get the farm under control;
d. Other responses as appropriate.
272. I see the broadcasting on channel 19 is a key component of that. Under a full ebb flow it might take 60 minutes for the farm to reach Scraggy Point near the Entrance. With five minutes notice a ship approaching the Tory Channel Entrance could abort that manoeuvre.
273. If the worst was to happen an appropriate emergency procedure would avoid a collision.
NZ King Salmon Navigation Report 29 September 2011 41/41
Kaiitiira U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_603_Navigation_Rich_Wai_Tap.mxd
1 9 1 9 1 5 m 9 m Kaitira m 8 8 Kaitira m 7
3
1 Whiite Horse Rock 7 1 4 1 m 7 m m 516 Waiitata
1 7 1 4 m
m 537 3 Tapiipii 19m
3 79m
4 4 6 m
m 9 4 2 236m Riichmond 193m
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken 7 by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from 2 9 any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa m Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2011
d
N 0 0.5 km n Existing Physical Structure Cadastre e NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON
g
e Proposed Physical Structure Whitehorse Rock L 1. Richmond, Tapipi, Waitata 1:25,000 @ A4 Proposed Cage Boundary ° th Date: 20 September 2011 Proposed Plan Change Site Projection: NZTM Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited Proposed Resource Consent Site www.boffamiskell.co.nz Data Sources: [email protected] U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_601_Navigation_Kaitira.mxd
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it
is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2011
m
7
2
0 2
Kaitira
3 2 20 7 2 m 5 m 7 m 0 5 4 3 m
d
N 0 0.5 km n e Existing Physical Structure Cadastre NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON
g
e L Proposed Structure - Currently Under Appeal 2. Kaitira ° 1:25,000 @ A4 Proposed Physical Structure Date: 4th August 2011 Proposed Cage Boundary Projection: NZTM Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited www.boffamiskell.co.nz Data Sources: Proposed Plan Change Site [email protected] U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_607_NavImpact_Rich_Tap_kai_Wai.mxd
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it Waihinau is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2011 Waihinau
Kaiitiira Whiite Horse Rock
Waiitata
Tapiipii Forsyth
Riichmond
d
N 0 1 km n Existing Physical Structure NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON
e
g
e Proposed Physical Structure
L Navigation Impact ° 1:75,000 @ A4 Proposed Cage Boundary 3. Kaitira, Richmond, Tapipi, Waitata th Projection: NZTM Proposed Plan Change Site Date: 9 September 2011 Data Sources: Cawthron bathymetry data is Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited www.boffamiskell.co.nz Proposed Resource Consent Site in terms of MSL [email protected] U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_602_Navigation_Papatua.mxd
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2011
m
4
2
3 m 0 1 6
m 3 1 Papatua 3 515m
MDC Marine Farm Layer
Closed Consent Order Expired Granted Granted but now under appeal High Court Lapsed Ministry Fisheries exclusion area Pre Application Processing Refused Refused but now under appeal Mellviilllle Surrendered Transferred
d
N 0 0.5 km n Existing Physical Structure Cadastre e NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON
g
e L Proposed Structure - Currently Under Appeal 4. Papatua ° 1:25,000 @ A4 Proposed Physical Structure Date: 4th August 2011 Proposed Cage Boundary Projection: NZTM Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited www.boffamiskell.co.nz Proposed Plan Change Site Data Sources: [email protected] U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_605_NavImpact_Ngamahau.mxd
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2011
Papatua
E
Mellviilllle Cove E FGMikhail Lermontov
E
d
N 0 1 km n FG Wreck of Mikhail Lermontov Existing Physical Structure NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON
e
g
e Proposed Structure - Currently Under Appeal
L Navigation Impact E Mooring Area ° 1:75,000 @ A4 Proposed Physical Structure 5. Papatua Walking Track th Projection: NZTM Proposed Cage Boundary Date: 8 August 2011 Data Sources: Cawthron bathymetry data is Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited www.boffamiskell.co.nz Proposed Plan Change Site in terms of MSL [email protected] U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_600a_Navigation_Ngamahau.mxd
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2011
m
9 m 4 6 0 1 3 20 9 m
3 3 0 m Ngamahau
Clay Point
d
N 0 0.5 km n Interislander Route Existing Physical Structure e NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON
g
e Picton to Wellington Proposed Structure - Currently Under Appeal L 6. Ngamahau ° 1:25,000 @ A4 Wellington To Picton Proposed Physical Structure Date: 4th August 2011 Cadastre Proposed Cage Boundary Projection: NZTM Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited www.boffamiskell.co.nz Proposed Plan Change Site Data Sources: [email protected] U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_605_NavImpact_Ngamahau.mxd
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2011
Ngamahau
Clay Point
Te Pangu
d
N 0 1 km n Interislander Route Existing Physical Structure NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON
e
g
e Picton to Wellington Proposed Structure - Currently Under Appeal L Navigation Impact ° 1:50,000 @ A4 Wellington To Picton Proposed Physical Structure 7. Ngamahau th Projection: NZTM Proposed Cage Boundary Date: 4 August 2011 Data Sources: Cawthron bathymetry data is Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited www.boffamiskell.co.nz Proposed Plan Change Site in terms of MSL [email protected] U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_604_Navigation_Rua_Kai.mxd
Ruakaka
Kaiitapeha
24 5m 1 7 m 1 0 m 1 2
315m 170m
Ruaomoko 1308m 474m 15 1 4m 5 6 m
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2012
d
N 0 0.5 km n Interislander Route Cadastre e NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON
g
e Picton to Wellington Existing Physical Structure L 8. Ruaomoko, Kaitapeha ° 1:25,000 @ A4 Wellington To Picton Proposed Structure - Currently Under Appeal th Wellington To Picton - Alternate (5°) Proposed Physical Structure Date: 8 March 2012 Projection: NZTM Proposed Cage Boundary Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited www.boffamiskell.co.nz Data Sources: [email protected] Proposed Plan Change Site U:\chch\2009\C09141_SD_NZKS_Aqua_Plan_MDC\GIS\C09141_605_NavImpact_Ngamahau.mxd
These plans and drawings have been produced as a result of information provided by the client and/or sourced by or provided to Boffa Miskell Limited by a third party for the purposes of providing the services. No responsibility is taken by Boffa Miskell Limited for any liability or action arising from any incomplete or inaccurate information provided to Boffa Miskell Limited (whether from the client or a third party). These plans/drawings are provided to the client for the benefit and use by the client and for the purpose for which it is intended. © Boffa Miskell Limited 2011
Ruakaka
Kaitapeha Ruaomoko Clay Point
Te Pangu
d
N 0 1 km n NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON e Interislander Route Existing Physical Structure
g
e
L Picton to Wellington Proposed Physical Structure Navigation Impact 1:60,000 @ A4 ° Wellington To Picton Proposed Cage Boundary 9. Kaitapeha, Ruaomoko Date: 4th August 2011 Projection: NZTM Wellington To Picton - Alternate (5°) Proposed Plan Change Site Data Sources: Cawthron bathymetry data is Plan Prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited www.boffamiskell.co.nz in terms of MSL [email protected]