DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 15 – Indigenous Biodiversity 15-1 15.2 RULES

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 15 – Indigenous Biodiversity 15-1 15.2 RULES 15 Indigenous Biodiversity 15.1 OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Objective IB1 Maintenance of the full range of the District’s indigenous habitats and ecosystems, including through restoration and enhancement. Policy 1 To promote and encourage the protection, restoration and enhancement of indigenous biodiversity, using a range of methods such as subdivision incentives, assistance, education and ecological corridors, whilst giving priority to significant biodiversity sites. Policy 2 To recognise sustainable land management practices and cooperative industry arrangements that reflect the principles of stewardship and kaitiākitanga, and to take into account the range of alternative methods in the maintenance and protection of indigenous biodiversity, including Tasman Forest Accord, NZFOA Forest Accord, Iwi Management Plans, Bay of Plenty Regional Council biodiversity management plans and protective covenants with the QEII Trust and Nga Whenua Rāhui. Objective IB2 Areas of indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna identified as significant in Schedules 15.7.1, 15.7.2 and 15.7.3 are protected. Policy 1 To ensure that subdivision, use and development, is undertaken in a manner that protects scheduled Significant Indigenous Biodiversity Sites by: a. in the coastal environment, avoiding adverse effects including the loss, fragmentation or degradation of those sites and cumulative effects on ecosystems; and b. outside the coastal environment, avoiding, and where avoidance is not practicable, remedying or mitigating adverse effects including the loss, fragmentation or degradation of those sites and the cumulative effects on ecosystems. Policy 2 To enable and encourage subdivision, land use and development that enhances indigenous biodiversity through the protection and enhancement of significant biodiversity sites. Policy 3 To determine the significance of indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna using criteria in Appendix F Set 3 Indigenous Vegetation and Habitats of Indigenous Fauna of the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement and for sites in the coastal environment using the criteria listed in Policy 11 of the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010. Policy 4 To require the restoration and rehabilitation of ecosystems and habitats, on or off sites, where the avoidance of adverse effects on Significant Indigenous Biodiversity Sites is not possible. Policy 5 To provide for the sustainable use of indigenous vegetation including Scheduled Significant Indigenous Biodiversity Sites where the adverse effects of this use are minor. 21 June 2017 Chapter 15 – Indigenous Biodiversity 15-1 15.2 RULES The following standards and terms apply to Permitted, Controlled, and Restricted Discretionary activities and will be used as a guide for Discretionary and Non-Complying activities. 15.2.1 Activity Status Table 15.2.1.1 The rules in this Activity Status Table relate only to any Significant Indigenous Biodiversity sites listed in Schedule A 15.7.1, Schedule B 15.7.2 and Schedule C 15.7.3. 15.2.1.2 Clearance of indigenous vegetation outside of Significant Indigenous Biodiversity Sites in Schedules 15.7.1, 15.7.2 and 15.7.3 is a permitted activity. Key P = Permitted D = Discretionary C = Controlled NC = Non-Complying RD = Restricted Discretionary Pr = Prohibited Schedule A Schedule C Schedule B Item Activity Status Coastal and Te Urewera Foothills Wetlands - Whirinaki 1. From the date of notification of this Plan to the date of adoption of the new Operative Plan, indigenous vegetation clearance within a Scheduled feature, P P P where all of the vegetation in the area to be cleared is not significant (see Rule 15.2.4.1). 2. Indigenous vegetation clearance, earthworks or structures within a scheduled feature that is in accordance with specific covenants or other legal instruments including; a. a Consent Notice or covenant for the protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats with the Council; b. a Biodiversity Management Plan or a Wetland Management Agreement approved by Bay of Plenty Regional Council or a resource consent from the Bay of Plenty Regional Council described in Rule 15.2.4.2; P P P c. a covenant for the protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats approved by Department of Conservation, d. a covenant for the protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats with the QEII Trust; e. a covenant for the protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats with Nga Whenua Rāhui; and f. a covenant for the protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats empowered under Treaty claims settlement legislation. 3. Indigenous vegetation clearance, earthworks, or structures in a scheduled feature carried out in accordance with a Conservation Management P P P Strategy, or management plan under the Reserves Act 1977, Conservation Act 1987, the National Parks Act 21 June 2017 Chapter 15 – Indigenous Biodiversity 15-2 1980, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993, or Te Urewera Act 2014. 4. Indigenous vegetation clearance, earthworks, or structures in a scheduled feature which is provided for in an Iwi or Hapū Management Plan approved by an P P P iwi authority which provides for the protection and maintenance of biodiversity, and which has been lodged with Council under s74(2A) of the RMA. 5. Any activities, other than those in 1 or 2 above, required for the protection, maintenance and restoration of any indigenous vegetation or habitat of indigenous species, P P P a. plant and animal pest control measures b. replanting in indigenous species c. fencing to exclude stock or pests. 6. Any clearance of indigenous vegetation which is: a. harvesting of mānuka or kānuka (excluding kānuka in the Rural Coastal Zone) for on-site domestic firewood purposes provided that the quantity does not exceed 10m3 per dwelling per annum and that NC P P an area equal to that harvested annually is replanted in the same year in the same or similar indigenous species or allowed to naturally regenerate; b. recovery of windfall and dead wood for domestic P firewood; c. within 2m of, and is part of the maintenance of, existing roads, structures, tracks (excluding walking P tracks), earth dams or fence lines or Lake Matahina Dam deformation survey points and sightlines; d. within 2m of, and is part of the formation of new P boundary fence lines whether or not on the legal cadastral boundary; e. for the formation of new walking tracks or P maintenance of existing walking tracks not exceeding 1.5m wide; f. within 10m of an existing dwelling, or within a building platform nominated and approved at the P time of subdivision; g. nominated and approved at the time of subdivision, P in the high to extreme fire hazard areas (see Appendix 18.7.3); h. trimming or pruning, along, under or above a work P or network utility or for sightlines along roads; and i. necessary for public safety. P 7. Clearance of up to 2000m2 of indigenous vegetation NC D RD 21 June 2017 Chapter 15 – Indigenous Biodiversity 15-3 per year, where the sum of all disturbances does not exceed 2 hectares or 10% of the scheduled feature on that site whichever is the lesser (from the date of notification of the Plan, 28 June 2013). 7.a Clearance of up to 300m2 of indigenous vegetation over a period of three years, excluding wetlands, indigenous dunelands, geothermal surface features, Pohutukawa forest, indigenous forests on alluvial plains, riparian margins (other than the riparian D RD C margins of Lake Matahina) and ecological sequences (e.g. from the salt marsh to forest), where the sum of all disturbances does not exceed 5% of the scheduled feature on that site (from the date of notification of the Plan, 28 June 2013). 8. Clearance of more than 2,000m2 of indigenous vegetation (excluding unlogged primary forest) per year, where the sum of all disturbances does not NC D D exceed 2 hectares or 10% of the scheduled feature on that site, whichever is the lesser (from the date of notification of the Plan, 28 June 2013). 9. Harvesting of mānuka and kānuka, excluding any kānuka in the Rural Coastal Zone, for commercial use provided that; a. an area equal to that harvested annually is replanted within one year in the same or similar indigenous species or allowed to naturally regenerate; b. the replanted or regenerating area is not subject to any further harvesting operation until at least D RD P1 twenty years has elapsed from the commencement of replanting or regeneration; c. no more than 10% of the total area of kānuka and mānuka in a scheduled feature on any site is harvested in any one year; and d. kānuka and mānuka is harvested only from identified areas where kānuka and mānuka represent at least 80% of the vegetation canopy cover. 10. Except as provided for in Activity 8 above, harvesting of indigenous species under a Sustainable Forest NC RD RD Management Plan, under the Forests Act 1949. 11. Placement or construction of a building within a scheduled feature, not within an approved building platform; a. where the entire lot is covered by the scheduled feature; or C C C b. there is no practicable alternative option outside of the feature (this activity does not include any associated vegetation clearance which would be covered by Activities 7 and 8) 11.a Placement or construction of a building within a P P P scheduled feature, where the building is within a 1 RD activity status applies where grazing is proposed during the natural regeneration phase 21 June 2017 Chapter 15 – Indigenous Biodiversity 15-4 building platform approved at the time of subdivision. 11.b Placement or construction of a building within a scheduled feature, not within an approved building platform; a. where the feature does not cover the entire lot; and NC NC NC b. practicable alternative sites exist on the lot outside the feature (This activity does not include any associated vegetation clearance which would be covered by Activities 7 or 8) 11.c Placement or construction of a building within a scheduled feature, not within an approved building platform; and a.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Combined Irrigation / Flood Control Storage in Upper Rangitāiki
    Combined Irrigation and Flood Storage in Upper Rangitāiki Catchment Bay of Plenty Regional Council 13-Jan-2017 Doc No. 1 Combined Irrigation / Flood Control Storage in Upper Rangitāiki Initial Feasibility Study 13-Jan-2017 Prepared for – Bay of Plenty Regional Council – Co No.: N/A AECOM Combined Irrigation and Flood Storage in Upper Rangitāiki Catchment Combined Irrigation / Flood Control Storage in Upper Rangitāiki – Initial Feasibility Study Combined Irrigation / Flood Control Storage in Upper Rangitāiki Initial Feasibility Study Client: Bay of Plenty Regional Council Co No.: N/A Prepared by AECOM New Zealand Limited 121 Rostrevor Street, Hamilton 3204, PO Box 434, Waikato MC, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand T +64 7 834 8980 F +64 7 834 8981 www.aecom.com 13-Jan-2017 Job No.: 60493009 AECOM in Australia and New Zealand is certified to ISO9001, ISO14001 AS/NZS4801 and OHSAS18001. © AECOM New Zealand Limited (AECOM). All rights reserved. AECOM has prepared this document for the sole use of the Client and for a specific purpose, each as expressly stated in the document. No other party should rely on this document without the prior written consent of AECOM. AECOM undertakes no duty, nor accepts any responsibility, to any third party who may rely upon or use this document. This document has been prepared based on the Client’s description of its requirements and AECOM’s experience, having regard to assumptions that AECOM can reasonably be expected to make in accordance with sound professional principles. AECOM may also have relied upon information provided by the Client and other third parties to prepare this document, some of which may not have been verified.
    [Show full text]
  • A HISTORY of the TUARARANGAIA BLOCKS Wai894 #A3 Wai36 #A22 Wai 726 #A4
    A HISTORY OF THE TUARARANGAIA BLOCKS Wai894 #A3 Wai36 #A22 Wai 726 #A4 PETER CLAYWORTH A REPORT COMMISSIONED BY THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL MAY 2001 CONTENTS LIST OF MAPS ....................................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... 6 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 8 i.i Claims relating to the Tuararangaia blocks ...................................................................... 12 CHAPTER 1: THE TUARARANGAIA BLOCK: TE WHENUA, TE TANGATA ....... 16 1.1 Te Whenua, Te Ngahere ................................................................................................. 16 1.2 Early occupation and resource uses ................................................................................ 19 1.3 Hapu and iwi associated with Tuararangaia ................................................................... 22 1.3.1 Ngati Awa ................................................................................................................. 22 1.3.2 Ngati Pukeko ............................................................................................................. 23 1.3.3 Warahoe .................................................................................................................... 24 1.3.4 Ngati Hamua ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rangitāiki River Forum
    Rangitāiki River Forum NOTICE IS GIVEN that the next meeting of the Rangitāiki River Forum will be held in Council Chambers, Whakatāne District Council, Civic Centre, Commerce Street, Whakatāne on: Friday, 7 June 2019 commencing at 10.00 am. Maramena Vercoe Chairperson Rangitāiki River Forum Rangit āiki River Forum Terms of Reference Interpretation “Rangit āiki River” means the Rangit āiki River and its catchment, including the: • Rangit āiki River • Whirinaki River • Wheao River • Horomanga River The scope and delegation of this Forum covers the geographical area of the Rangit āiki River catchment as shown in the attached map. Purpose The purpose of the Forum is as set out in Ng āti Manawa Claims Settlement Act 2012 and the Ng āti Whare Claims Settlement Act 2012: The purpose of the Forum is the protection and enhancement of the environmental, cultural, and spiritual health and wellbeing of the Rangit āiki River and its resources for the benefit of present and future generations. Despite the composition of the Forum as described in section 108, the Forum is a joint committee of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council and the Whakat āne District Council within the meaning of clause 30(1)(b) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002. Despite Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Forum— (a) is a permanent committee; and (b) must not be discharged unless all appointers agree to the Forum being discharged. The members of the Forum must act in a manner so as to achieve the purpose of the Forum. Functions The principle function of the Forum is to achieve its purpose.
    [Show full text]
  • Trustpower-Soe-Greg-Ryder.Pdf
    IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER of Proposed Plan Change 9 to the Bay of Plenty Regional Natural Resources Plan AND submissions and further submissions by Trustpower Limited STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF GREGORY IAN RYDER Evidence of G. I. Ryder 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 My full name is Gregory Ian Ryder. 1.2 I hold BSc. (First Class Honours) (1984) and PhD. (1989) degrees in Zoology from the University of Otago. For both my honours dissertation and PhD. thesis I studied stream ecology with particular emphasis on sedimentation and benthic macroinvertebrates. 1.3 I am a member of the following professional societies: (a) New Zealand Freshwater Society; (b) Royal Society of New Zealand; (c) Society for Freshwater Science (North America). 1.4 I am a Director and Environmental Scientist at Ryder Environmental Limited (Ryder) and have worked as a consultant for approximately 25 years. I work largely in the field of surface water quality and aquatic ecology. I also fulfil the role of an independent commissioner and have sat on over 25 resource consent hearings. 1.5 I have undertaken or been associated with a large number of investigations that have assessed the effects of abstractions and discharges on surface water ecosystems, the effects of existing and proposed impoundments, and the effects of land use activities that produce point source and non-point source discharges. 1.6 My work covers the whole of New Zealand. Private industries, utility companies, local and regional councils and government departments engage me to provide advice on a wide range of issues affecting surface waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries Assessment of Waterways Throughout the Rangitaiki WMA
    Fisheries assessment of waterways throughout the Rangitaiki WMA Title Title part 2 Bay of Plenty Regional Council Environmental Publication 2016/12 5 Quay Street PO Box 364 Whakatāne 3158 NEW ZEALAND ISSN: 1175-9372 (Print) ISSN: 1179-9471 (Online) Fisheries assessment of waterways throughout the Rangitāiki WMA Environmental Publication 2016/12 ISSN: 1175-9372 (Print) ISSN: 1179-9471 (Online) December 2016 Bay of Plenty Regional Council 5 Quay Street PO Box 364 Whakatane 3158 NEW ZEALAND Prepared by Alastair Suren, Freshwater Ecologist Acknowledgements Thanks to Julian Sykes (NIWA Christchurch), Geoff Burton, Whetu Kingi, (Te Whare Whananga O Awanuiarangi), Paddy Deegan and Sam Fuchs, for assistance with the field work. Many of the streams visited were accessible only through private land, and could only be accessed with the help and cooperation of landowners throughout the area. Funding for this work came from Rob Donald, Manager of the Science Team, Bay of Plenty Regional Council. Environmental Publication 2016/12 – Fisheries assessment of waterways throughout the Rangitāiki WMA i Dedication This report is dedicated to Geoff Burton, who was tragically taken from us too soon whilst out running near Opotiki. Although Geoff had connections to Ngati Maniapoto (Ngati Ngutu) and was born in the Waikato, he moved with his wife and children back to Torere in the early 2000s to be closer to her whanau. Geoff had been a board member of Te Kura o Torere and was also a gazetted Ngaitai kaitiaki. He was completing studies at Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi where he was studying Te Ahu o Taiao. It was during this time that his supervisors recommended Geoff to assist with the fish survey work described in this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Rangitāiki River Estuary National Objectives Framework (NOF)
    Water quality and ecology of the Rangitāiki Water Management Area Rangitāiki River Estuary National Objectives Issues: Nutrients can promote excess plant and algae growth. We measure plant and algae growth by Framework (NOF) Increasing nutrients measuring the concentrations of chlorophyll-a, the The National Policy Statement includes a National Objectives Framework pigment in plants that is used for photosynthesis. (NOF), which sets compulsory national values for freshwater to protect Nuisance biological growths The Rangitāiki estuary has the highest maximum ‘human health for recreation’ and ‘ecosystem health’. chlorophyll-a concentrations and the second highest Whitebait habitat median of the Bay of Plenty river estuaries. The NOF has a series of ‘bands’ ranging from A to D, and National Bottom Lines for the following attributes in rivers: River estuaries are dynamic environments with Chlorophyll-a To protect ecosystem health: Nitrate, Ammonia 16 large changes in tidal and river flows. About 63 Median To protect human health for recreation: E.coli, Cyanobacteria percent of native freshwater fish species use 14 estuaries to swim between fresh and salt water. 25%-75% 12 Like many river estuaries, the Rangitāiki has little Min-Max aquatic vegetation or macro-algae. 10 Freshwater usually dominates the water quality 8 NOF Banding of river estuaries. Flood flows and the delivery of 6 sediment and nutrients into estuaries can make it 4 Nitrate hard for plants and animals to live and grow there. Phosphorus and nitrogen are increasing in the 2 estuary. Nitrogen is also increasing in the whole 0 Ammonia catchment, while phosphorus is only increasing in -2 the lower catchment.
    [Show full text]
  • Rangitaiki River Catchment Annual Work Programme for 2016
    Rangitāiki Catchment Programme Annual Work Plan 2016 / 2017 Rangitaiki Catchments Programme Annual Work Plan 2016/2017 Contents 1. Purpose 3 2. Background 3 3. Assumptions 4 4. Programme 5 4.1 Key Service Delivery Tasks 5 4.3 Te Ara Whānui o Rangitāiki 7 4.4 Governance and programme management 24 4.5 Integrated planning 26 4.6 Science 29 4.7 Operations 30 5 Financials 38 6 Appendices 39 Appendix 1: Maritime Activity details 39 Appendix 2: Rivers and Drainage Activity details 40 2 Rangitaiki Catchments Programme Annual Work Plan 2016/2017 1. Purpose The purpose of the Rangitāiki River Catchment programme is to coordinate Bay of Plenty Regional Council work, including work required for Te Ara Whānui o Rangitāiki – Pathways of the Rangitāiki, to deliver on community expectations. The work programme covers all significant activities in the river catchment, including work across policy and planning, science, pollution prevention and maritime service functions. It also includes all operational activities such as biosecurity, biodiversity protection, coast care, rivers and drainage, and sustainable land management. The programme covers all significant activities (both projects and ongoing work) in the river catchment area carried out by Regional Council. The programme is broken into five areas of focus and presented in the following sections: • Te Ara Whānui O Rangitāiki – Pathways of the Rangitāiki • Governance and programme management • Integrated planning • Science • Operations 2. Background Council does not have a specific vision or outcomes for the catchment but the Rangitāiki River Forum of which we are a partner does in Te Ara Whānui O Rangitāiki (Te Ara Whānui o Rangitāiki) – Pathways of the Rangitāiki, and they are entirely suitable.
    [Show full text]
  • Longfin Eel Habitat That Is Not Fished
    GIS mapping of the longfin eel commercial fishery throughout New Zealand, and estimates of longfin habitat and proportion fished New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report 2016/32 M.P. Beentjes J. Sykes S. Crow ISSN 1179-5352 (online) ISBN 978-1-77665-280-8 (online) June 2016 Requests for further copies should be directed to: Publications Logistics Officer Ministry for Primary Industries PO Box 2526 WELLINGTON 6140 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0800 00 83 33 Facsimile: 04-894 0300 This publication is also available on the Ministry for Primary Industries websites at: http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/publications.aspx http://fs.fish.govt.nz go to Document library/Research reports © Crown Copyright - Ministry for Primary Industries Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Previous studies ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Commercial eel fishery ........................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Current status of stocks ........................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Objectives ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting LGNZ's Local Government Sector
    Action for healthy waterways: A discussion document on national direction for our essential freshwater Local Government New Zealand’s submission to the Ministry for the Environment 31 October 2019 1 2 We are. LGNZ. LGNZ is the national organisation of local authorities in New Zealand and all 78 councils are members. We represent the interests of councils and lead best practice in the local government sector. LGNZ provides advocacy and policy services, business support, advice and training to our members to assist them to build successful communities throughout New Zealand. Our purpose is to deliver our sector’s Vision: “Local democracy powering community and national success.” This final submission was endorsed under delegated authority by Dave Cull, President, Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) and Doug Leeder, Chair of LGNZ’s Regional Sector. This submission has been prepared by the Regional Sector Water Subgroup (RSWG)] on behalf of wider local government sector, comprising regional councils, unitary authorities and territorial authorities (the Sector)]. All those parties have been consulted and have actively contributed to the development of this submission. It represents their collective and common position on the merits and challenges of the Essential Freshwater Reform package (EFW package) as set out in the discussion document Action for Healthy Waterways and the accompanying draft national instruments1. To the extent that individual councils have made their own submissions, those submissions should be read as being in addition to the matters raised here. Individual councils’ submissions inevitably address matters of particular interest and relevance to their respective regions and districts that may not be addressed in this sector-wide submission.
    [Show full text]
  • Response to Kyle Christensen Request Re Prelowering of Lake
    ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Peter Blackwood <[email protected]> To: Ken Tarboton <[email protected]> Cc: Peter West <[email protected]>, Martin Butler <[email protected]>, Mark Townsend <[email protected]> Bcc: Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 05:04:59 +0000 Subject: FW: Information Request 20170616 1701 Hi Ken, Another one. Pete Peter Blackwood Principal Environmental Engineer Bay of Plenty Regional Council Toi Moana P: 0800 884 880 DD: 0800 884 881 x9527 E: [email protected] W: www.boprc.govt.nz A: PO Box 364, Whakatāne 3158, New Zealand Thriving together – mō te taiao, mō ngā tāngata From: Peter West Sent: Tuesday, 20 June 2017 3:11 p.m. To: Peter Blackwood Cc: Martin Butler; Mark Townsend Subject: RE: Information Request 20170616 1701 Peter, AYached results from DHI this morning for the informa\on request below (5:01pm 16 June 2017). The aYached workbook includes our Te Teko model inflow hydrograph (sent to DHI yesterday) and a chart showing the dam management outputs. Our work on this yesterday found that an increase to 550m3/s at 6:15pm on the 5th (phone request confirmed by email at 6:13pm) instead of at about 8:15pm (what actually happened) would have caused the lake level to reach a minimum of 71.19mRL at 9:45pm, instead of 71.57mRL (0.383m lower; all other ac\ons held constant). This scenario leads to a 12am on the 6th April dam management tool result for op\mum peak discharge at of 677m3/s (8m3/s less than the actual (archived) tool result).
    [Show full text]
  • Nelson—Bottom Sediments of Lake Rotoma 187
    New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 1983, Vol. 11 : 185-204 185 0028-8330/83/1702-0185S2.50/0 © Crown copyright 1983 Bottom sediments of Lake Rotoma CAMPBELL S. NELSON INTRODUCTION Department of Earth Sciences Although much is known of the chemistry and University of Waikato biology of lakes in central North Island, New Private Bag Zealand (e.g., Fish 1970; McColl 1972; Jolly & Hamilton, New Zealand Brown 1975; Hint 1977), little information is yet available on the texture and composition of the bottom sediments or the patterns and processes of Abstract Lake Rotoma is a deep (70-80 m), sedimentation in these lakes. Because of the oligotrophic, warm monomictic lake of volcanic influence of sediment substrate on such diverse origin with insignificant stream inflow and no clearly characteristics as sublacustrine slope stability (e.g., defined outflow. For at least 60 years up to 1972 the Irwin 1975), the nature and density of aquatic lake level fluctuated markedly about an overall vegetation (e.g., Brown 1975), the geochemical rising trend of some 6-10 m. Nearshore profiles are environment at the lake floor (e.g.. Glasby 1973), related to the prevailing wave climate superimposed and ultimately the trophic status of waters (e.g., upon the overall rising lake level, shelves being McColl 1977; White et al. 1978), a sampling and wider, less steep, and deeper about the more analysis programme of bottom sediments of central exposed eastern and southern shorelines. The outer North Island lakes has been started at the University portions of shelves extending well below modern of Waikato.
    [Show full text]
  • Rangitaiki - Tarawera Rivers Scheme Asset Management Plan
    E NVIR ONMENT B. O .P Environment B·O·P Operations Report 98/03 September 1998 Bay of Plenty Regional Council RANGITAIKI - TARAWERA RIVERS SCHEME ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN Report prepared by Philip Wallace, Technical Services Section Environment B·O·P Quay Street P O Box 364 Whakatane NEW ZEALAND ISSN 1173 - 6232 Environment B·O·P Foreword This plan is a statement by Environment B·O·P, the Manager of the Rangitaiki–Tarawera Rivers Scheme, as to how it will manage the assets of that scheme. The plan represents prudent management as required by the Local Government Amendment Act (No.3) 1996. The plan was adopted by the Council during April 1998 following liaison and consultation, in particular with the scheme ratepayers. Cover Photo: Rangitaiki River Mouth Operations Report 98/03 q:\mas\ors\docs\Rangitaiki-Tarawera Asset Mgmt Plan Environment B·O·P i Executive Summary The purpose of this plan is to provide a document for the management of the Rangitaiki– Tarawera Rivers Scheme and in particular its infrastructural assets. It establishes and communicates the level of funding required to maintain and meet the scheme objectives and levels of service. The plan covers the assets of the scheme including stopbanks, floodgates, pump stations, rockwork and other erosion protection measures, and plantings. The current valuation at September 1996 (in terms of Local Government Act requirements) of these assets is $22.5 million. The assets are generally in good condition and with existing maintenance programmes are providing the desired levels of service, although previous diversion of maintenance funds to flood damage repairs has compromised riverbank edge protection.
    [Show full text]