BOARD OF INQUIRY NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON PROPOSAL
IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991
AND
IN THE MATTER of a Board of Inquiry appointed under section 149J of the Act to consider plan change requests and resource consent applications made by The New Zealand King Salmon Company Limited
______
STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF LINDSAY DAYSH IN RELATION TO RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANNING FOR KIWIRAIL LIMITED (UPDATED) ______
______
Barristers & Solicitors
J G A Winchester / H P Harwood Telephone: +64-4-499 4599 Facsimile: +64-64-4-472 6986 Email: [email protected] DX SX11174 P O Box 2402 Wellington
Page 1 22570049_1.docx CONTENTS
Executive summary...... [3] Introduction...... [12] Scope of Evidence ...... [19] Background ...... [27] Resource Management History ...... [30] Strategic Documents...... [40] Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan...... [47] Relationship With Other Statutes...... [68] Interisland Ferry Services as a Matter of National Significance ...... [70] New Zealand Transport Strategy ...... [72] Section 142(3) of the RMA...... [79] New Zealand King Salmon Proposal ...... [84] Interislander's Submission ...... [84] Other Submissions...... [86] Navigational Issues ...... [87] Reverse Sensitivity...... [92] Conclusions...... [95]
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan Map 107 – National Transportation Route.
2. Certificate of Compliance Pursuant to s139 of the Resource Management Act 1991 concerning the lengthened MV Aratere; and Resource Consent for the use of the MV Kaitiaki.
Page 2 22570049_1.docx EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3. Crossing the Cook Strait by ferries and other ships has been a feature of the Marlborough Sounds for a considerable period of time. Interislander's three roll on roll off ferries carry a large percentage of the road and rail freight that moves between the North and South Islands, as well as significant numbers of passengers between Wellington and Picton.
4. I understand though that there is little flexibility in terms of the logistics for loading, unloading and sailing times for each ferry movement. Any delays would cause significant effects. As such the Interislander relies on a policy framework and rules which enable it to continue its current level of services.
5. The importance of interisland ferries is recognised both in strategic documents and in decisions of the Environment Court. Ferries are also recognised in the Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan (MSRMP) as being very important to Marlborough and New Zealand’s economic wellbeing.
6. Ferries in the Marlborough Sounds have been the subject of debate and some litigation since the mid 1990’s. The majority of this litigation was around ferry wash and the wider implications ferry wash has on the environment in Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel. This debate has been resolved by the Environment Court endorsing a variation to the MSRMP that allows the continued use of larger vessels within certain speed constraints in the National Transportation Route. This variation is part of the planning framework.
7. I have assessed the operation of interisland ferries as being of national significance. I consider this assessment to be uncontroversial because interisland ferries are the primary link for rail freight, road freight and ferry passengers between the North and the South Island. Additionally, ferries make a significant contribution to Marlborough's economy.
8. Part of New Zealand King Salmon's (NZ King Salmon) proposal is relatively close to the National Transportation Route (NTR) at the western entrance to Tory Channel from Queen Charlotte Sound and in Tory
Page 3 22570049_1.docx Channel itself. Navigation evidence received from a Master on the Interislander is that the ferries could continue to operate safely without additional restrictions or additional safety concerns, if these salmon farms are granted consent.
9. The Interislander made a neutral submission but was supportive of proposals for economic development in the Marlborough Sounds. As a result of submissions that raised navigational safety matters, I agree that Interislander is correct to be concerned about reverse sensitivity effects, if any additional restrictions were to be imposed that may affect its operations.
10. In relation to the purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) in Part 2 of that Act I consider that interisland ferry operations are a physical resource which should be sustained for the wider social and economic wellbeing of New Zealand. This needs to be reconciled against the requirement to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects, but the effects on the environment of ferry operations have recently been considered by the Environment Court.
11. While there are a number of other issues to be considered by the Board where the whole of Part 2 will be considered, navigation matters form a discrete part of that consideration. It will, in my view, be important that the submissions relating to any navigation safety issues on the NTR as a result of the proposal are resolved without compromising existing ferry operations.
INTRODUCTION
Qualifications and Experience
12. My name is Lindsay John Daysh. I hold a Bachelor of Regional Planning from Massey University and a graduate qualification in Transport Systems Engineering from the University of South Australia. I am a member of the New Zealand Planning Institute and the Resource Management Law Association.
13. I have some 25 years experience in town planning and resource management in New Zealand and in Britain. This includes extensive
Page 4 22570049_1.docx experience in central government agencies, local authorities and since 2004 as a consultant carrying out a broad range of planning matters including strategic planning, policy development, project development and development control. I am also an independent commissioner and was a member of the Rugby World Cup Authority in 2010-11.
14. My current position is Principal Consultant for Incite Limited, a resource management and environmental consultancy based in Wellington.
15. Prior to my move to Incite in November 2010 I was New Zealand Planning Manager with GHD Limited, where I held national responsibility for all planning matters. Preceding this I was Regional Planning Manager at Transit New Zealand for Wellington/Nelson/Marlborough/Tasman, had two periods of employment at Wellington City Council, worked for the London Borough of Hillingdon and the former Ministry of Works and Development.
16. I am very familiar with Marlborough having been involved in a number of planning and transport planning tasks in the region since 1999. Most of my recent work in the region has been focused upon the Wairau Plains, where I was the team leader and Principal Planner for the Blenheim and Wairau Plains Transport Study in 2009. However I have also maintained a broad interest in many issues affecting the region and the Marlborough Sounds, particularly in transport matters. At a strategic level I have also contributed to previous Marlborough Regional Land Transport Strategies under the Land Transport Management Act 2003.
17. The majority of my recent work has been in relation to strategic transport planning at regional level in a number of locations nationally as well as RMA processes for development of transportation projects including a number of roads of national significance projects. Examples of some of my recent work are listed below.
(a) I was the primary author of the Plan Change concerning Transmission Gully that was considered by a Board of Inquiry; (b) I am the planning manager for stage 2 of the Christchurch Southern Motorway; and (c) I am a planning adviser for the NZTA’s Wellington Northern Roads of national significance projects.
Page 5 22570049_1.docx Code of Conduct
18. I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for expert witnesses contained in the Environment Court of New Zealand Practice Note 2011 and that I agree to comply with it. I confirm that I have considered all the material facts that I am aware of that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express. This evidence is entirely within my area of expertise.
SCOPE OF EVIDENCE
19. I have been requested by Interislander (a division of KiwiRail Ltd) to provide evidence on its behalf in relation to planning matters insomuch as it relates to the operation of the interisland ferry service in the Marlborough Sounds. Compared to the breadth of the issues before the Board, KiwiRail’s interests are very confined. These relate to two matters.
(a) Whether the plan change and resource consents sought by the applicant has any effect on the safe and efficient functioning of interisland ferry operations through the Marlborough Sounds.
(b) Whether there are any reverse sensitivity effects whereby the existence of salmon farms may mean that there is potential for additional concerns or constraints upon shipping operations.
20. I am broadly familiar with the sites on Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel but am not familiar with other parts of the Sounds. In any event these sites are beyond the primary shipping channel and the identified NTR contained within the MSRMP.
21. I have reviewed the relevant application documents, the relevant submissions, Marlborough District Council’s Key Issues Report and the planners report.
22. My evidence will address:
(a) the relevant background and resource management history; (b) the relevant MSRMP objectives and policies to the extent necessary;
Page 6 22570049_1.docx (c) the national strategic framework for interisland operations; (d) the national importance of the Interisland Ferry Route including reference to some recent resource management history and the national strategic context; (e) the relationship between the RMA and the Harbour Masters powers under the Navigation Bylaw; (f) the navigation reports and evidence; and (g) KiwiRail's submission and other relevant submissions.
23. I will also make some short conclusions in relation to Part 2 of the RMA.
24. I realise that the applications before you cover much wider matters than those relating to navigation. I therefore do not comment on any of the ecological matters relevant to the Plan Change or the overall merits of the applications in terms of potential impacts upon the aquatic environment. Similarly I do not comment on coastal occupation issues, cultural values or visual amenity matters.
25. Three of the nine sites are within or in close proximity to the National Transportation Route being Kaitepeha and Ruamoko (both opposite Dieffenbach Point) near the entrance to Tory Channel from Queen Charlotte Sound and Ngamahau within Tory Channel itself. The remainder of the sites are well removed from the primary large vessel shipping routes.
26. It is also important at this time to emphasise that, in my view, there is no need to comment on the possible alternative South Island terminal location of Clifford Bay alternative South Island terminal location. The fact is that Interisland shipping travels through Tory Channel and Queen Charlotte Sound and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future.
BACKGROUND
27. Mr Davis, the Interislander General Manager, has outlined in his evidence the operational characteristics of the Interislander services. This is that there are three roll on roll off ferries that operate up to 16 sailings per day that carry road and rail freight as well as significant numbers of passengers between Wellington and Picton. It is also notable that the
Page 7 22570049_1.docx scheduled services are tightly managed with little room for delay in the loading, unloading and sailing times for each ferry movement.
28. He also notes that the connection between the North and South Islands is critical to New Zealand’s productivity and that Interislander needs to maintain its service frequency and capacity. In this regard any potential for disruption in the efficient operation of scheduled ferry services may result in, at worst case, a reduction in services across Cook Strait.
29. It is noted that other ferries also provide an interisland service while there are also other freight, passenger and recreational users of the NTR through the Marlborough Sounds. Map 107 of the MSRMP shows this route and a blow up of the Queen Charlotte Sound/ Tory Channel location has been attached to the Council's key issues report. I include both for the sake of convenience as Attachment 1 to this evidence.
Resource Management History
30. The Board will be familiar with some of the more recent resource management history of shipping activity in the Marlborough Sounds.
31. The first is what is called the ‘fast ferry’ case1. This case concerned enforcement order proceedings bought about by Save the Sounds - Stop the Wash Inc. NZ and Others, against the Council and fast ferry operators in 1995. This action sought to use enforcement proceedings to address the effects caused by large, high speed vessels such as fast ferries. The decision of the then Planning Tribunal was to decline to make an enforcement order against the fast ferry operators.
32. Of particular relevance to these proceedings is the Courts comment on the national importance of the interisland link on page 22 as follows.
In a particular case, and the case I have just quoted is but one instance, it is therefore possible to hold that a particular activity assumes such importance in the context of the sustainable management of New Zealand as a whole, that it can of itself, assume national importance. That is not to say that the activity
1 Marlborough District Council v New Zealand Rail Ltd [1995] NZRMA 357
Page 8 22570049_1.docx can override the primary purposes of the Act as enshrined in s.5 but is indicative of the fact that in certain circumstances the matters expressed in Part II as being of national importance or to which the Tribunal must have particular regard, can be balanced against a specific activity which is proved to be of national importance in any particular case. I find the inter-island link is such an activity.
33. I will comment further on national importance matters later in my evidence.
34. An outcome was that Council sought to review its Resource Management Plan as a way of balancing wider environmental concerns as well as providing certainty for shipping operators using the Sounds. In any event Interislander discontinued using its fast ferries some time ago but it did raise the issue of reconciling the national interest in interisland ferry links with strongly felt conservation concerns.
35. The second relevant event was the promulgation of Variation 3 to the MSRMP. Variation 3 introduced a new policy framework and rules to govern the operation of ships through a NTR in the Tory Channel and inner Queen Charlotte Sound. This was subsequently appealed to the Environment Court.
36. I understand that the most controversial part of the variation was the introduction of a wash/energy rule that allowed vessels to operate through the NTR at 15 knots as a permitted activity. Any vessel that travels faster than 15 knots must apply for resource consent on the basis that it does not generate a wave that exceeds the stipulated maximum wave height. In the event that the maximum wave height is breached, the rules of the Variation 3 prohibit that vessel operating in the NTR.
37. This had significant implications for the operation of Interislander services and it was agreed that there be a “grandfathering” clause whereby the existing ferries (Aratere and Arahura) could continue at 20 knots until they were replaced by compliant vessels. The Kaitaki operates under a resource consent.
Page 9 22570049_1.docx 38. The Court, in its decision on Variation 3,2 considered a number of matters and found that a Wash/Energy Rule was appropriate but took into account the national importance of interisland ferry operations. The Court's decision is reflected in the current objectives, policies and rules within the MSRMP that I discuss later in my evidence.
39. For the Board's information, Interislander holds a certificate of compliance for the MV Aratere and a resource consent for the MV Kaitaki under the rules. These are attached as Attachment 2.
Strategic Documents
40. The importance of the interisland ferry link for New Zealand is reflected in a number of strategic policy documents.
41. The first is the New Zealand Rail Strategy to 2015 (2005)3. While the document is heavily focused on land based rail operations, the Cook Strait ferry is specifically referred to as being an integral part of the rail network. As Mr Davis outlines in his evidence two of the three current Interislander ferries carry a significant amount of rail freight.
42. The second is the National Infrastructure Plan4 which was released on 4 July 2011. The Plan outlines the Government’s 20 year vision for New Zealand’s infrastructure which is:
Government's overall vision for transport A transport sector that supports economic growth by achieving efficient and safe movement of freight and people.
43. Of particular importance are two goals for our transport infrastructure which are:
(a) A rail system that enables the efficient movement of freight and complements other modes of passenger transport and freight movement.
2 Tranz Rail New Zealand Ltd and Others v Marlborough District Council W 1/2008. 3 http://www.transport.govt.nz/about/publications/Documents/nationalrailstrategy.pdf 4 http://www.infrastructure.govt.nz/plan/2011
Page 10 22570049_1.docx (b) Sea and air ports that are linked to the overall transport network and are able to respond to technological changes and changing international safety and security standards.
44. These goals are directly applicable as the Interislander ferries are a significant component of the rail network and they provide the linkage to the land transport system in both the North and South Islands.
45. The most recent strategic document is referred to as Connecting New Zealand5. This summarises a number of direction-setting documents for the sector. It draws together the policy direction that has been set out in a number of policy decisions and guidance documents over the last 2 years. These include the National Infrastructure Plan, the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport Funding 2012/13–2021/22, the New Zealand Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy, the KiwiRail Turnaround Plan and Safer Journeys: New Zealand’s Road Safety Strategy 2010–2020.
46. I need not discuss these further as each of these documents provides detailed guidance on their particular areas of the transport system. While the Cook Strait services are not expressly discussed the concepts of economic efficiency, affordability and increasing reliability are key themes.
MARLBOROUGH SOUNDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
47. In my view the MSRMP is the key location-based Resource Management document for the Sounds. The NZ Coastal Policy Statement and the Regional Policy Statement will also be significant in terms of the wider consideration of the NZ King Salmon proposal, but in my view neither are determinative on the matter of possible navigation safety issues relating to the particular sites.
48. When considering the MSRMP policy framework and the defined issue of large vehicle navigation safety I have considered the relevant objectives and policies contained in Chapter 19 which concerns Water Transportation and part 9.5 which addresses ships operating in the the Coastal Marine
5 http://www.transport.govt.nz/ourwork/KeyStrategiesandPlans/Documents/Connecting%20NZ_on line_version_9_September.pdf.
Page 11 22570049_1.docx Area. These were amended as a result of the Environment Court's decision on Variation 3 referred to earlier.
Part 19 MSRMP – Water Transportation
49. Part 19 identifies three issues at 19.2.
The need to: (a) Recognise and provide for the different types of water transport; (b) Manage the adverse effects of water transportation; and (c) Provide for the maintenance and enhancement of navigational safety.6
50. The following two paragraphs from the explanation to the issues discuss relevant matters for navigation. Firstly, the 8th paragraph states:
With regard to navigation, the main function of the Plan is to ensure that activities in the coastal marine area, when allowed either directly by the Plan or by a resource consent, do not adversely affect navigational safety. The inappropriate siting of a structure may have an effect on the ability of vessels travelling in that area to navigate safely. Some control needs to be exercised over the exact location of structures in relation to important water transportation routes and other structures.
51. Further, the 10th paragraph states:
In addition, there have been a range of adverse environmental effects experienced from ship generated waves and speed, through the operation of fast and large ships within Tory Channel and Queen Charlotte Sound, in particular. While some aspects of their operation are dealt with in this chapter, a more comprehensive policy framework addresses the issues surrounding ship-generated waves and speed at 9.5 of the Coastal Marine chapter.
6 Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan s19.2 p19-1
Page 12 22570049_1.docx 52. From this description of issues it is clear that navigational safety and the operation of large ships are matters to be considered in the planning framework. These issues are followed up by one objective and nine policies (noting that there are two Policy 1.7s). I have highlighted the Objective and the relevant policies below.
Objective 1: Safe, efficient and sustainably managed water transport systems in a manner that avoids, remedies and mitigates adverse effects.
Policy 1.1 Avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of activities and structures on navigation and safety, within the coastal marine area.
Policy 1.2 Ensure land based activities and subdivision do not adversely impact on the safety and efficiency of water transportation in the Sounds.
Policy 1.3 Avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of water transport activities on the natural and physical resources of the Sounds.
Policy 1.4 Achieve an appropriate balance between water transportation and other users of the coastal marine area.
Policy 1.5 Identify and enable the use of water transport corridors which form a significant part of the transport network.
Policy 1.6 Provide for surface water transportation activities which do not have a significant adverse effect on the coastal environment.
Policy 1.7 Recognise and allow for those structures, facilities, coastal access and appropriate loading sites where no adequate land transportation is available to serve an area.
Policy 1.7 Recognise the following jetties and landing areas as necessary community/commercial landing areas: Oyster Bay (Port Underwood), Elaine Bay (Tennyson Inlet), Okiwi Bay (Croisilles Harbour), Elmslie Bay (French Pass), Kapowai Bay (d’Urville Island) and Portage.
Page 13 22570049_1.docx Policy 1.8 Avoid the adverse effects of transporting forestry produce through water by using barges or other vessels rather than rafting techniques.
53. In my view these are all sound policies, particularly Policy 1.4 which refers to achieving an appropriate balance between the needs of water transport and other users in the coastal marine area.
54. Part 19.4 states Methods of Implementation for these policies. The first is Area Identification which states:
Tory Channel and part of Queen Charlotte Sound have been identified as a National Transportation Route -see Volume Three. The National Transportation Route is located in Tory Channel (between East and West Head) and extends into inner Queen Charlotte Sound (between West Head, Ruakaka Bay, and a point southwest of Kaitapeha Bay) to the Port of Picton (excluding Grove Arm).
55. This identified area is shown in Map 107 attached as Appendix 1.
56. The second method is Rules which states:
Rules relating to the use of surface waters by ships apply to Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel. The use of surface waters in these areas is subject to maximum speed limits and for controlled activities, a maximum wave energy limit as well.
The areas to which speed limits apply are defined in Volume Three Maps.
Other forms of water transportation and shipping in other areas of the Sounds are provided for as of right.
57. The relevant rule for interisland ferries is the wash/energy rule. I discuss in paragraphs 30 to 389 above The third method is Other Legislation which states:
Page 14 22570049_1.docx Navigation and public safety within the harbour limits is also the responsibility of the Council as a harbour authority. The Council's Harbourmaster, under Harbour Bylaws, the Navigation Bylaw 2000, the Maritime Transport Act and associated Maritime Rules, (or any successor to the above bylaws or regulations) carries out these functions. Harbour bylaws may impose additional constraints on speed e.g. the 5 knot harbour speed limit.
58. I will discuss the relationship between the proposal and the Marlborough District Council Navigation Bylaw 2009 administered by the Harbour Master later in this evidence.
59. The final two methods of implementation are Education and Monitoring.
Part 9 MSRMP – Coastal Marine Area
60. Part 19 refers to and in some places duplicates Part 9 relating to the policy framework for the Coastal Marine Area. However the issue of large ships travelling at speed is considered at part 9.5 which reads:
Ships capable of travelling at speed or generating significant wake in enclosed waters have the potential to conflict with a range of other coastal users and values and generate adverse environmental effects.
61. The discussion provides the context for the issue. There are four paragraphs of the explanation to the issue which are of particular relevance:
It needs to be recognised that shipping activity contributes to the social and economic wellbeing of people and communities by providing an important link between the North and South Islands and also by providing a means of transport for goods within the Sounds. (This issue is also covered in Chapter 19 Water Transport.) Tory Channel and inner Queen Charlotte Sound in particular comprise a transportation route of national significance for shipping activity and, as such, it is important to recognise this
Page 15 22570049_1.docx route as a resource that needs to be sustainably managed in the Plan.
In managing the effects of the wake generated by conventional ships in Tory Channel and Queen Charlotte Sound, it is accepted that shipping operators have certain operating parameters that affect ship speed that need to be accounted for. In particular, the operators of conventional inter-island shipping services, have relied on an ability to operate their fleets of conventional ships at speeds of up to 20 knots in Tory Channel and inner Queen Charlotte Sound. This operating speed has been necessary historically to enable conventional vessels to achieve a sufficient number of daily crossings of Cook Strait to maintain a generally accepted level of service and for these services to remain socially and economically viable, from the perspective of the wider community.
The operation of the fast ferries has been controlled within Tory Channel and Queen Charlotte Sound by a Navigation Bylaw since 15 December 2000. This bylaw resulted in fast ferry operators being required to slow the speed of their ships from up to 40 knots to 18 knots within the confines of Tory Channel and Queen Charlotte Sound. Whilst the bylaw was primarily intended to manage navigation safety issues within the waters of the Sounds, evidence obtained from monitoring carried out by the Council indicated that the ship speed reduction had resulted in environmental benefits as well. Prior to the fast ferry speed restrictions being put in place there was wide community concern about the adverse effects being created by the waves generated by these ships-operating in the Sounds. Some residual concerns remain about the effects of ship-generated waves on marine biology, shoreline geomorphology, shoreline structures, recreational values, small boat safety and Maori cultural values. The Council continues to monitor these values and effects. Recent indications are that, since the introduction of the fast ferry speed restrictions, there has been some improvement and recovery in the condition of the environment, particularly around the coastal margin of the Sounds.
Page 16 22570049_1.docx The potentially adverse effects of ship-generated waves need to be managed in a manner that provides for the continued economic, social and cultural wellbeing of all people and communities, while sustaining the coastal environment. This is particularly so for the future as it is likely that shipping activity within Tory Channel and Queen Charlotte Sound will increase. International regulations for roll-on roll-off passenger ferries have introduced enhanced safety requirements regarding ship stability for vessels carrying more than 400 people. This will ultimately mean that larger ships are expected to be operating along the inter-island ferry route. This along with industry trends towards the use of larger, faster ships means that there is potential to generate greater effects in future than those experienced presently.
62. The objective and policies reflect the issues above. The four Policies which are most relevant to interisland ferries being Policies 1.1 through to 1.4. The Objective is:
To ensure that the environmental effects of ship-generated waves and speed are managed so that potential conflict with other coastal users and values is avoided, remedied or mitigated.
63. Policies 1.1 to 1.4 are:
Policy 1.1 Enable as a permitted activity the continuing use of the National Transportation Route and Queen Charlotte Sound by ships travelling up to 15 knots.
Policy 1.2 Enable as a permitted activity the continuing use of the National Transportation Route for existing inter-island shipping services up to speeds that reflect the operating regime that was current at 14 November 2002.
Policy 1.3 Apply controls to shipping activity in Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel, based on the amount of energy produced by ship-
Page 17 22570049_1.docx generated waves, which may cause adverse environmental effects.
Policy 1.4 When considering applications for consent for ships that are expected to propagate waves having energy levels in excess of limits specified in the Plan, to have particular regard to the potential for adverse effects on:
Places and cultural values of importance to Te Atiawa;
The shoreline and lawfully-established shoreline structures;
Amenity values enjoyed by residents;
People's use and enjoyment of the foreshore and coastal marine area for recreational activities; and
The natural character of the coastal environment of the Sounds
Policy 1.5 Work with the community and the shipping industry to continually assess the appropriateness of the overall framework for shipping activities in light of environmental and technological changes or the occurrence of unforeseen effects from shipping activity.
64. The remaining policies refer to monitoring (1.6), working with Te Atiawa (1.7) recognising Te Atiawa's continued access to resources, (1.8) maintaining life supporting capacity of coastal ecosystems (1.9), maintaining access for people to safely use the foreshore and coastal marine area for recreation (1.10) and maintaining the ability to utilise lawfully established structures (1.11).
65. The methods of implementation largely reflect those outlined in Chapter 19 being area identification, rules, other legislation and monitoring with the addition of compliance and enforcement, the establishment of an advisory group and a partnership with Te Atiawa.
Page 18 22570049_1.docx 66. It is clear that considerable debate has occurred for the planning framework for interisland ferries. That discussion has been resolved. It produced the objectives, policies and methods described above, which I consider appropriately balance the national importance of interisland ferries and the environmental issues in the Marlborough Sounds.
67. Interislander continues to rely on the planning framework to perform its operation to a satisfactory level.
RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER STATUTES
68. Shipping activity in the Marlborough Sounds is governed by a number of pieces of legislation largely relating to safety. Of particular relevance is the Marlborough District Council Navigation Bylaw 2009 administered by the Harbour Master. From a review of the document it appears that the Bylaw provides significant control over activities outside of any express consents or compliance with permitted activity conditions under the Resource Management Act 1991.
69. Saying that I consider it appropriate to consider navigation matters alongside all of the other issues raised as being relevant to the Boards determination as both an effect in terms of s104(1)(a) and an “any other matter” in accordance with s104(1)(c) of the Act. I note here that some submissions including the one from Marlborough District Council have raised navigation as a potential issue.
INTERISLAND FERRY SERVICES AS A MATTER OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE
70. Ferry services between the North and South Islands have been in operation through much of New Zealand’s European history. The link across Cook Strait is variously described as a ‘bridge’, or a link between the North Island and South Island sections of State Highway One, and also a link between the North and South Island main trunk rail lines. In that respect, I consider that the effective operation of the Cook Strait crossing is a matter of national significance.
Page 19 22570049_1.docx 71. In reaching that conclusion, I have considered how Cook Strait shipping fits within the definition of national significance in the RMA. In my view, the best proxy is to consider the principles contained in the New Zealand Transport Strategy (NZTS)7 and the factors set out section 142(3) of the RMA.
New Zealand Transport Strategy
72. The NZTS was updated in August 2008 to replace the original strategy published in 2002. I will comment on the five key objectives in relation to operation of interisland ferries. The five objectives are:
(a) Ensuring environmental sustainability; (b) Assisting economic development (improving trip reliability and reducing journey times on critical routes); (c) Assisting safety and personal security (reducing deaths and serious injuries as a result of road crashes); (d) Improving access and mobility (increasing mode share of public transport, walking and cycling and other active modes); and (e) Protecting and promoting public health (reducing the number of people exposed to health endangering levels of noise and air pollution).
Ensuring environmental sustainability
73. This is not only about emissions in my view but also about avoidance of adverse effects. Shipping of goods and passengers in the most efficient way assists with this objective.
74. In terms of environmental effects, the effects from ferries have been addressed through the changes to the MSRMP described above.
Assisting economic development (improving trip reliability and reducing journey times on critical routes)
75. As Mr Davis describes, Interislander strives to operate its ferries as efficiently and as quickly as possible. Mr Davis has also outlined the
7 http://www.transport.govt.nz/ourwork/Documents/NZTS2008.pdf
Page 20 22570049_1.docx precise nature of Interislander's logistics for ferry turnarounds with little room for adaption without the possibility of a reduction in services. This is shown through Interislander's 50 minute port turnaround. Any reduction in the ferries' efficiency would be contrary to this objective.
76. I consider that the ferry link is a critical route overall in the context of New Zealand’s transport system.
Assisting safety and personal security (reducing deaths and serious injuries as a result of road crashes)
77. Safety and personal security is a largely a matter governed by other legislation. I note that the evidence of Captain Walker at paragraph 41 of his evidence sets out the range of legislation and policy documents that apply to shipping, a number of which are firmly focused on maritime safety.
Improving access and mobility (increasing mode share of public transport, walking and cycling and other active modes) and protecting and promoting public health (reducing the number of people exposed to health endangering levels of noise and air pollution)
78. These objectives are not applicable to whether the current Cook Strait shipping operations are matters of national significance.
Section 142(3) of the RMA
79. I have also considered section 142(3) of the RMA which sets out relevant facts that the Minister may consider when deciding a matter is or is part of a proposal of national significance. I have highlighted the matters which in my view, would apply if the Interislander services were to be considered under this section.
80. Section 142(3) states:-
In deciding whether a matter is, or is part of, a proposal of national significance, the Minister may have regard to—
Page 21 22570049_1.docx (a) any relevant factor, including whether the matter—
(i) has aroused widespread public concern or interest regarding its actual or likely effect on the environment (including the global environment); or (ii) involves or is likely to involve significant use of natural and physical resources; or (iii) affects or is likely to affect a structure, feature, place, or area of national significance; or (iv) affects or is likely to affect or is relevant to New Zealand's international obligations to the global environment; or (v) results or is likely to result in or contribute to significant or irreversible changes to the environment (including the global environment); or (vi) involves or is likely to involve technology, processes, or methods that are new to New Zealand and that may affect its environment; or (vii) is or is likely to be significant in terms of section 8; or (viii) will assist the Crown in fulfilling its public health, welfare, security, or safety obligations or functions; or (ix) affects or is likely to affect more than 1 region or district; or (x) relates to a network utility operation that extends or is proposed to extend to more than 1 district or region; and
(b) any advice provided by the EPA.
81. It is the last two criteria that would apply as the operation of Cook Strait Shipping is the connection between the Wellington and Marlborough regions while the ferries connect road and rail transport networks that extend throughout the country.
82. In any event, it is my view that many of the matters that contribute to interisland ferries' national significance have already been traversed
Page 22 22570049_1.docx through previous the RMA processes and Environment Court decisions referred to above.
83. Therefore I consider that it is plain that the efficient operation of ferry services between the North and South Islands is a matter of national significance.
NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON'S PROPOSAL
Interislander's Submission
84. As Mr Davis has states at paragraph 12 of his evidence, the Interislander's submission was neutral but it supports sustainable economic development in Marlborough. He also confirms that the applicant has consulted with the Interislander in relation to any potential navigation issues for the three farms in and around Tory Channel.
85. I understand that this position has not changed in principle. But, because navigational safety has been raised in other submissions, Interislander would like to ensure that the proposal does not impact on its ferry operations.
Other Submissions
86. A number of submissions raised navigational issues. These include a submission by the Marlborough District Council (submission 102). The submission states, at 5.2.2, that potential navigational safety matters have not been properly assessed. I am not aware whether this is a global comment or whether it applies to the National Transportation Route.
Navigational Issues
87. As outlined in my introduction, Interislander's interest in the broad range of matters before you is discrete. It concerns perceived navigation safety issues for ferries on the NTR. These perceived concerns are due to the location of the three proposed salmon farm sites of Ruaomoko, Kaitapeha (both opposite Dieffenbach Point) and Ngamahau.
Page 23 22570049_1.docx 88. It is clear that poorly located, and poorly designed salmon farms could present issues with navigation through the Marlborough Sounds and particularly in Tory Channel where most of the larger vessels travel. I note though there has been an extensive analysis of navigational issues by the expert witnesses who have provided navigational evidence.
89. As a practicing Master of Interislander ferries with an in depth knowledge of the Marlborough Sounds particularly for large vessels, I rely on Captain Walkers analysis at paragraphs 119 and 120 of his evidence in relation to large vessels. These paragraphs state:
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 315).
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.
90. I also note that Captain Walker also refers to Maritime New Zealand’s “Guidelines for Aquaculture Management Areas and Marine Farms” (at paragraph’s 121 to 127). He concludes that the minimum figures set out in that document do not apply to salmon farms in the Marlborough Sounds.
91. Assuming that Captain Walker's conclusions are accepted by the Board, then Interislander should be able to continue to operate in its current manner if NZ King Salmon's salmon farms in or close to Tory Channel are granted consent.
Page 24 22570049_1.docx Reverse Sensitivity
92. The Board will be aware of the concept of reverse sensitivity, and I do not intend to repeat it in detail in my evidence. Reverse sensitivity is described on Quality Planning's website8 as:
Reverse sensitivity describes the effect that development of one kind may have on activities already occurring in an area. It usually results from the people involved in an activity that is newly established, complaining about the effects of existing activities in an area.
93. Interislander would be concerned about potential reverse sensitivity effects on its ferry operations if navigation issues were to arise from the NZ King Salmon proposal. Mr Davis has described Interislander's finely tuned operation and the significant consequences that would arise if the speed restrictions were lowered. Consequently, Interislander relies heavily on the current planning framework.
94. However, I note though that the expert evidence to date does not indicate any significant navigational issues from the three proposed sites in Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel.
CONCLUSIONS
95. In relation to the purpose of the RMA in Part 2 of that Act I consider that interisland ferry operations are a physical resource which should be sustained for the wider social and economic wellbeing of New Zealand. The inter-island link was recognised by the Environment Court in 1995 as an activity of national importance.
96. The importance of the interisland link needs to be reconciled against the requirement to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects and it is important to note the framework for effects assessment of ferry operations has recently been considered by the Environment Court.
8 http://www.qualityplanning.org.nz/plan-topics/noise-management/reverse-sensitivity.php
Page 25 22570049_1.docx 97. While there are a number of other issues to be considered by the Board where the whole of Part 2 will be considered, navigation matters form a discrete part of that consideration. It will, in my view, be important that the submissions relating to any navigation safety issues on the NTR as a result of the proposal are resolved without compromising existing interisland operations.
Lindsay Daysh Incite Ltd
14 August 2012
Page 26 22570049_1.docx Attachment One
Marlborough Sounds Resource Management Plan Map 107 - National Transportation Route.
Page 27 22570049_1.docx Attachment Two
Certificate of Compliance pursuant to s139 of the Resource Management Act 1991 concerning the lengthened MV Aratere.
Resource Consent for the use of the MV Kaitiaki
Page 28 22570049_1.docx