Agenda of Environment and Services Committee

Meeting of the Environment and Services Committee

Date: Wednesday 9 March 2016

Time: 9.00 am

Venue:

Council Chamber

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

159 Dalton Street

NAPIER

Agenda

Item Subject Page

1. Welcome/Notices/Apologies

2. Conflict of Interest Declarations

3. Confirmation of Minutes of the Environment and Services Committee held on 9 December 2015

4. Matters Arising from Minutes of the Environment and Services Committee held on 9 December 2015

5. Follow-ups from Previous Environment & Services Committee Meetings 3

6. Call for any Minor Items Not on the Agenda 17

Decision Items

7. Te Mata Park – 10:00 am 19

8. Te Karamu Enhancement Strategy and Operational Plan 21

Information or Performance Monitoring

9. Active Hawke's Bay - presentation by Sport HB – verbal - 9:15 am

10. Wide Scale Predator Control and Feral Cat Management - 10:45 am 65

11. Otane Wastewater Resource Consent Application 73

12. Lake Tutira Science Update 75

13. Resource Use Update 77

14. Ebbetts Stopbank - Tutaekuri River – verbal

15. Minor Items Not on the Agenda 81

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 09 March 2016

SUBJECT: Follow-ups from Previous Environment & Services Committee Meetings

Reason for Report

1. Attachment 1 lists items raised at previous meetings that require follow-ups. All items indicate who is responsible for each, when it is expected to be completed and a brief status comment. Once the items have been completed and reported to the Committee they will be removed from the list.

Decision Making Process

2. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that as this report is for information only and no decision is required in terms of the Local Government Act’s provisions, the decision making procedures set out in the Act do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Environment and Services Committee receives the report Follow-up Items from Previous Environment & Services Committee Meetings.

Mike Adye

Group Manager

Asset Management

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management

Attachment/s

1	Follow Ups from 9 December 2015 meeting
2	Riverbed Gravel Extraction Management - Section 36 Charges
3	Upper Tukituki Scheme - HBRC's responsibilities

Follow Ups from 9 December 2015 meeting

Attachment 1

Follow-ups from Previous Environment & Services Committee Meetings

9 December 2015

	Agenda item	Follow-up item	Person Responsible	Status/Comment
1	Derek Williams Lake Tutira Presentation	Report responding to Mr Williams’ presentation to a future Environment and Services Committee meeting	I Maxwell	Update on Lake Tutira science on the March E&S agenda.
2	CHBDC Wastewater Compliance Update	Update on the Otane resource consent application to be presented to an Environment and Services Committee meeting in 2016	I Maxwell	Paper from Malcolm Miller, Manager Consents on this agenda.
3	Gravel Management Review Timetable	Request to investigate options for progressing Tukituki review more quickly	M Adye	Legal opinions covering roles – responsibilities and potential use of s36 charges to encourage gravel extractors to Upper Tukituki have been obtained and shared with Upper Tukituki Liaison Group. These opinions are attached (Attachment 2 & 3) for Council information. Options for removing gravel from Upper Tukituki Rivers were discussed with Liaison Group at meeting on 1 March 2016. Agreed that options will be considered by HBRC and landowners and further discussed in approx. 2 months. Issues are where should it be taken to and should it be farmed into a stock pile or stop bank, What will be the cost of removal, who should pay.
4	Tukituki Gravel Issues	Communicate exactly who is responsible for doing what, to provide clarity to ratepayers	M Adye
5	Science January-July 2016 Operational Report	Does HBRC soil monitoring programme include molybdenum?	I Maxwell	No it doesn’t.
6	Follow-ups	Visit from PCE to talk about Oil & Gas Exploration regulation	L Lambert	No response received from PCE office, after second email and phone call

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 09 March 2016

Subject: Te Mata Park

Reason for Report

1. In May 2015, Council:

1.1. Agreed in Principle to retain the allocation of $500,000 pending completion of the Long Term Plan process for further development of Te Mata Park for the period to 31 December 2015 pending consideration of a 10 year Management Plan for Te Mata Park to be prepared and presented to Council prior to that date.

2. In June 2015, Council:

2.1. Considered the submission from #34 Damon Harvey, Tim Wilkins, Russell Nettlingham, Richard Stone requesting $104,000 for development of mountain bike trails, and referred the proposal to the Te Mata Park Trust Board.

2.2. Deferred Council’s consideration of the proposal until such time as the Trust Board reports back to Council with alternative proposals for the use of the $500,000 allocated for the Visitor Information Centre.

3. Te Mata Park Trust Board representatives have requested opportunity to provide Council with an update on progress with the drafting of a 10 year Management Plan for Te Mata Park.

4. The Trust Board requests that the allocation of $500,000 is retained pending finalisation of the 10 year Management Plan. The Trust Board advise that they expect to circulate the final Management Plan prior to the next Environment and Services Committee meeting programmed for 11 May 2016; and seek the opportunity to present the Plan to that meeting.

Decision Making Process

5. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:

5.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

5.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation, however the proposal for HBRC to increase its contribution towards operational funding for the Park was included in the consultation on the 2015-25 Long Term Plan.

5.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.

5.4. No persons are directly affected by this decision.

5.5. Options may be considered by Council as part of their deliberations.

5.6. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

5.7. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

1. That the Environment and Services Committee receives the Te Mata Park report.

2. The Environment and Services Committee recommends that Council:

2.1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision.

2.2. Agrees to receive the final 10 Year Management Plan for Te Mata Park at the next meeting of the Environment and Services Committee meeting programmed for 11 May 2016.

2.3. Retains the allocation of $500,000 in the Long Term Plan for the Te Mata Park Visitor & Education Centre for the period to 30 June 2016 pending consideration of a final 10 year Management Plan for Te Mata Park to be prepared and presented to Council prior to that date.

Steve Cave

Manager

Open Space Development

Mike Adye

Group Manager

Asset Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 09 March 2016

Subject: Te Karamu Enhancement Strategy and Operational Plan

Reason for Report

1. Staff have recently completed a “Te Karamu Enhancement: Review and Management Strategy 2016-2025”. A copy of this document (excluding appendices) is attached for Councillor Information and consideration. Electronic copies can be made available to the public on request.

2. A copy of the appendices will be provided to Councillors on request. The full report will be available through Council’s website by 10 March 2016.

3. This paper seeks Council endorsement of the Te Karamu Enhancement: Review and Management Strategy 2016-2025 and its proposed implementation.

Background

4. The Karamu can be divided into 11 sub-catchments including over 238 kilometres of waterways. These waterways have evolved through a series of transformations over time influenced by changing land use, urbanisation, landuse intensification, impacts of plant and animal pests, channel realignment as well as other natural and human induced changes.

5. The catchment also serves to convey storm water away from the Heretaunga Plains, including the expanding urban areas of Hastings and Havelock North as well as commercial and industrial areas surrounding them.

6. The catchment and particularly its primary waterways are becoming increasingly valued as a source of irrigation; as a biodiversity corridor; for landscape views from public and private areas; and as a public recreational area.

7. In 2004, Council approved the ‘Te Karamu Catchment Review and Options for Enhancement’ report. This document provided a thorough analysis and detailed recommendations for the enhancement of the management of the Karamu Catchment. Presented to Council at that time was a rough order cost estimate of $14,148,492 for enhancement work.

8. In its Long Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP) 2006/16 Council included within the Karamu Drainage Catchment budgets:

8.1. A rate on the Havelock North community to assist funding the enhancement works.

8.2. A provision for $100,000 annually for specific expenditure on enhancement works.

8.3. An additional provision of $10,000 in the 2007/08 financial year and increasing by $10,000 per year in each subsequent year to provide for maintenance work.

Overview of Operations to Date

9. Implementation of enhancement aspects of the 2004 Te Karamu report commenced in 2006/2007. Enhancement work since then has focused on land within the Karamu catchment which is owned and / or managed by the HBRC from Whakatu (5kms upstream from Waitangi Estuary) to Bridge Pa (35kms upstream).

10. Enhancement has involved re-creating patches of native vegetation, protecting existing native vegetation, removing stock from berm areas, creating wetlands at tributaries and within river berm areas, improving access for maintenance and public use, providing advice and encouragement for neighbours, including marae, to engage in enhancement activity and providing opportunity for engagement and education of school and community groups.

11. Total enhancement expenditure for the 9 financial years from 2006/2007 through to 2014/2015 has been:

11.1. $1,613,000 on capital works (ie approx. 8.65% of the estimated cost of the project, without taking into account inflation costs since the original estimate was completed)

11.2. $538,000 on maintenance.

12. Capital expenditure includes physical works as well as provision for staff time, consultants and community engagement. Maintenance expenditure relates to maintaining planted areas, mowing of high amenity areas and maintenance of access points and pathways.

13. Approximately 21 hectares (14.76%) out of a total of 142 hectares of land identified as available for enhancement has been enhanced to date. This includes the planting of approx. 123,500 native plants, noting that some of the identified enhanced areas include tracts of land enhanced prior to 2004.

Te Karamu Enhancement Management Strategy 2016-2025

14. The Strategy has been drafted to progress the enhancement work in the context of the changes that have occurred and the progress that has been made in implementing recommendations of the 2004 report to date. It further aims to build on the significant community and marae support established since 2004 as awareness continues to grow with the maturing of the initial enhancement projects.

15. The revised Strategy is primarily intended as a guide for the open space development and management of public land within the Karamu catchment which is owned or managed by the HBRC.

16. This Strategy provides a vision or ‘toolbox’ to enable the Karamu Stream and its tributaries to be maintained as a highly valued asset to Hawke’s Bay, providing a vision for balancing values where grazing, native vegetation, and recreational areas support a rich and abundant ecosystem that is accessible and easily managed.

17. The Strategy’s overarching objective is to ‘improve habitat and ecosystem health whilst providing flood and erosion protection’. This objective has been further defined into 24 management objectives based on the ‘2004 values and management objectives’ structure.

18. Core strategy values are:

18.1. Drainage and Flood Control

18.2. Ecological (Stream Habitat, both Terrestrial and Aquatic)

18.3. Amenity and Aesthetic

18.4. Cultural, Social and Recreational

19. It is proposed that the ‘Te Karamu’ Enhancement project continues through the application of the following:

19.1. Controlling plant pests and preventing re-establishment

19.2. Controlling animal pests and preventing re-establishment

19.3. Protecting and preserving existing animals and plants that are desirable

19.4. Re-establishing an indigenous ecosystem (framework)

19.5. Protecting and enhancing cultural, social and recreational values

20. Further it is proposed that a monitoring framework be established and applied to assess enhancement progress and management effectiveness. The revised Strategy includes recommendations on objective and outcome assessment, monitoring targets and measures.

Rate of Enhancement

21. A total of 142 hectares of HBRC owned or managed land is identified as available for enhancement. Of this 21 hectares has been enhanced. It is further identified that an appropriate target of 50% of the total area is used for enhancement planting to meet the Strategy’s objectives.

22. Two funding scenarios have been prepared to progress the enhancement Strategy.

22.1. The first has been developed on the current rate of capital investment of approximately $200,000 per annum (including staff time). This scenario will see approximately 23% (31 hectares) of the total available area utilised for enhancement purpose by 2025.

22.2. The second has been developed with an annual capital investment of approximately $400,000 per annum (including staff time). This scenario will see approximately 50% (71 hectares) of the total available area utilised for enhancement purpose meeting the identified target.

23. These scenarios are summarised in the table below.

24. The significant percentage increase in “area planted” between the $200,000 per year and $400,000 per year scenarios is explained through fixed costs (staff time, consultants, engagement provision) being relatively static between the two options.

25. Maintenance provision currently equates to $110,000 per annum and is expected to continue or slightly reduce at the current rate of enhancement. An increase in capital investment would see an increase in maintenance provision being required in the short term.

26. Budget provision for the first scenario (ongoing investment at approx. $200,000/year) is included in the LTP 2015/25 and therefore in the 2016/17 Annual Plan. This is expected to result in a total of approximately 30.5 hectares planted by 2025 out of a total area available of 142 hectares. Staff propose that the second scenario is reconsidered by Council in the 2017/18 year as part of the development of the 2018/28 LTP.

Decision Making Process

27. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained in Part 6 Sub Part 1 of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded:

27.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

27.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

27.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.

27.4. Options for consideration are outlined in the paper.

27.5. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

27.6. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

The Environment and Services Committee recommends that Council:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community.

2. Endorses the report ‘Te Karamu Enhancement: Review and Management Strategy 2016-2025” and notes that adequate provision is included within the LTP 2015/25 to continue enhancement work over the next 10 years such that approx. 30.5 hectares of planting will be completed by 2025.

3. Request staff to update Council during the 2017/18 financial year on progress and request Council at that time to reconsider the implementation timeframe for the Strategy as part of the development of the 2018/28 LTP.

Steve Cave

Manager

Open Space Development

Mike Adye

Group Manager

Asset Management

Attachment/s

Te Karamu Enhancement Review and Management Strategy 2016-2025

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 09 March 2016

Subject: Wide Scale Predator Control and Feral Cat Management

1. Across New Zealand there is increasing discussion about the impact predators have on our economy and environment. Key predators are:

· possums,

· feral cats,

· mustellids (stoats, ferrets and weasels),

· rats and

· hedgehogs.

2. A range of stakeholders including philanthropic organisations are exploring the value proposition for reducing predator numbers to very low levels across large areas of New Zealand and how best to achieve the goal. Feral cats have a range of adverse impacts and success in their long term management will be an important part of reducing the economic and environmental impacts predator vertebrate pests have. Long term success will also require both urban and rural community support.

3. This report discusses the current staff approach to feral cat management as one of the predators to be managed under wide scale predator control. HBRC’s role also needs to be viewed alongside the role of other key stakeholders in this area.

4. Geoff Simmons of the Morgan Foundation and a member of the National Cat Management Strategy Group will be present on the Draft New Zealand Cat Management Strategy that the group is developing. Geoff will also discuss the Morgan Foundations perspective on what Regional Councils can do in the short to medium term in sensitive wildlife areas.

Comment

5. Much of New Zealand’s biodiversity is unique to our country and it is in decline. The major contributors to biodiversity decline are habitat loss and the impacts of plant and animal pests – particularly predator pests. Pests also have significant economic impacts particularly given the importance of land based activities to our economic prosperity.

6. The current Hawke’s Bay Regional Pest Management Plan recognises the importance of predator pest management. Within the Plan predator pests are listed as a site specific pest. This means that HBRC will work with land occupiers within a specific area to control pest numbers. There are a wide range of individuals, community groups and agencies that take advantage of this provision and the subsidy available from HBRC to undertake predator control to protect environmental or economic values around specific sites within the region.

7. HBRC also has a substantial investment in predator control throughout the region through its flagship Possum Control Area (PCA) programme which now covers approx. 650,000 ha of productive land. The Cape to City project is currently trialling how feral cats, mustelids can be integrated into the PCA concept at very low cost.

8. Feral cat control however brings with it a range of challenges not associated with other predator pests. This is because cats are also domestic pets and as companion animals are common throughout our society. Feral cat management therefore requires a much closer balancing of individual and community rights and values than other predator pests. The rights of individuals to have cats as companion animals need to be balanced with the importance of protecting the economic and environmental values that are also important to the community.

9. While the long term successful control of feral cats will require both urban and rural community support, staff currently focus the majority of their effort on the effective management of feral cats within a rural environment. There are a range of reasons for this:

9.1. Ninety five percent of the economic and environmental adverse impacts of cats within New Zealand take place on rural and public conservation land. The immediate objective is to reverse the environmental decline and gain the economic benefits possible from feral cat management within these settings.

9.2. Regional councils are not well placed to use statutory powers under the Biosecurity Act 1993 (BSA) within an urban area as proxies for Territorial Local Authority (TLA) or Unitary Authority bylaws.

9.3. HBRC’s urban possum control programme (HUB) has proven that engaging urban communities into the value of pest management, resulting in significant biodiversity response from some native birds, does not necessarily require cat management. For example tui have trebled and bell bird have doubled within areas monitored on Bluff Hill, Napier with no cat management.

10. Urban communities are however a very important part of a long term successful feral cat management solution. For example:

10.1. Releasing of unwanted cats within rural areas are a source of reinfestation to successful rural control.

10.2. The ability of some native species to thrive in urban areas will depend upon minimising the impacts of cats.

10.3. Urban communities are a critical constituency in the long term funding and social support of predator pest programmes.

11. The Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) is programmed for review over the next 2 years. This will provide an opportunity for HBRC to consider whether or not to involve the Hawke’s Bay community in a discussion over the management of cats within the region.

12. Under the Biosecurity Act 1993 (BSA) RPMP rules could be included requiring for example micro chipping to allow for more effective feral cat management in specific sensitive wildlife areas. This however is likely to be of value only if other predator pests are also being managed at that site. Subject to meeting other statutory requirements such as the Animal Welfare Act 1999, the BSA also facilitates the widescale control of feral cats as a predator pest.

13. If cats are to be more proactively managed a balance will be required between the adverse economic and environmental effects that cats cause and the rights of individuals to keep cats as companion animals. This is likely to require statutory change both at a central government and local government level. For example lack of clarity around the distinction between feral, stray and domestic cats in the Animal Welfare Act 1999 requires central government legislative change. At a local government level effective urban management of the adverse effects of cats will require TLA or Unitary Authority bylaws related to the responsibilities of cat ownership. This could include initiatives such as microchipping. In a rural context more active use by Regional Councils / Unitary Authorities of the BSA provisions for feral cat management are also part of an integrated solution.

14. All of these initiatives will require community support to be successful. This support is more likely if the community better understands the adverse impacts cats have alongside the companion animal benefits. The role of philanthropic organisations such as the Morgan Foundation is important in facilitating this community debate around cat management in New Zealand.

15. A range of stakeholders (including Local Government New Zealand) formed the National Cat Management Strategy Group in November 2014. This group is currently participating in the preparation of a draft National Cat Management Strategy. The intent of this group is to develop an overarching national strategy for responsible, caring and humane cat management in NZ through a proactive and collaborative approach. The draft strategy document and the letter of intent are included as appendices to this agenda item.

16. Within the Cape to City project feral cats will be controlled in a rural environment alongside other predator pests. How this is managed is a close focus of staff involved in the project. Examples of the proposed landowner options within the Cape the City project area include:

16.1. One on one visits to all property owners and dwellings within the direct control area to discuss control options and the risks to domestic cats.

16.2. Photographing of domestic cats within the direct control zone to enable those undertaking control to identify domestic pets.

16.3. Offering free cat collars and free microchipping / desexing for cats within the direct control area. Control staff will carry microchip readers.

16.4. Placing buffers around the urban areas within the 26,000 ha project footprint and graduating from no control to live capture within buffer zones, to kill trap networks outside them.

16.5. Working closely with Hastings SPCA staff and local vets around risks to domestic cats and how these are best managed.

16.6. Additional predator control focused around pathways such as cat dumping risk points.

17. The control of feral cats and the overall management of cats in New Zealand is an important issue. Feral cats are a key predator of our unique declining native species and also carry diseases that have animal and human health impacts such as toxoplasmosis. Successful long term management of feral cats will require broad community support and statutory change. HBRC has a role in this long term strategy as do a range of other stakeholders. Staff believe that HBRC is well placed to be a leader in showing how widescale predator control (including feral cat control) can be successfully applied across large areas of farmland and demonstrate how regional biodiversity will benefit. This is what will drive immediate and significant environmental and economic benefits.

Decision Making Process

18. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Environment and Services Committee receives the Wide Scale Predator Control and Feral Cat Management report.

Campbell Leckie

Manager

Land Services

Mike Adye

Group Manager

Asset Management

Attachment/s

1	The National Cat Management Strategy Group Strategic Intent
2	Draft New Zealand National Cat Management Strategy

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 09 March 2016

Subject: Otane Wastewater Resource Consent Application

Reason for Report

1. At its meeting on 9 December, the Committee requested an update on the Resource Consent application for the Otane wastewater resource consent process and related issues.

Background

2. The resource consents for the Otane oxidation pond discharge expired on 30 September 2015. Applications for replacement consents were received on discharge consent 30 June 2015 three months prior to expiry. At the Council’s discretion this allows them to enjoy s124 rights and therefore to continue under their expiring consent until such time as their replacement consent is issued.

3. Currently the consent is on hold under s92 awaiting further information. This further information requires sampling and analysis of surface and groundwater in the vicinity of the discharge. This is to characterize the effects of the discharge on the groundwater. Sampling commenced in January and relies on 3 rounds of sampling no less than a month apart. GNS is to be engaged to analyse this data and to report their findings.

4. Processing of the consent will continue once this information is provided.

Decision Making Process

5. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Environment and Services Committee receives the Otane Wastewater Resource Consent Application report.

Malcolm Miller

Manager

Consents

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 09 March 2016

Subject: Lake Tutira Science Update

Reason for Report

1. At its meeting on 9 December, the Committee requested a report in response to Mr Derek Williams presentation on water levels in Tutira Lake resulting from a heavy rainfall event in September 2015.

Background

2. HBRC have been collecting water quality information from Tutira Lake and its catchment since 2008 to drive lake and catchment ecosystem models. The primary goal of this programme has been to provide management recommendations to reduce algal blooms in the lake, as well as to investigate likely ecological impacts of reconnecting some or all flows from Papakiri Stream/Sandy Creek to the lake. This research also utilises data from the lake monitoring buoy which provides continuous real-time information on water quality in the lake.

3. There were at least two distinct fish kill events in 2016, the first just after the New Year, and the second at the end of January. These were the first reported major fish kills at Tutira in recent years, and affected both the trout and eel populations.

4. Data from the monitoring buoy shed light on what caused these fish kills. The first appeared to be driven by a combination of warm water and low oxygen which seems to have coincided with a partial mixing event. The second kill was associated with a period of extremely warm water (>30°C), and high cyanobacterial levels which were associated with very high pH levels (>9.5). For both events we believe the compromised life supporting capacity of the water was either driven or compounded by the presence of cyanobacterial and/or algal blooms. There is no evidence that fish were directly killed by toxin production from cyanobacteria.

5. Although modelling work is ongoing, preliminary catchment and lake simulations can be used to inform investigations of management options. Key outcomes of monitoring and modelling analyses to date are:

5.1. The lake appears to be strongly phosphorus limited. This means algal growth is likely to increase when more phosphorus is available.

5.2. Algal blooms often follow shortly after flood events when the lake is stratified, or after mixing events, both of which can provide pulses of nutrients (including phosphorus and nitrogen) to the lake.

5.3. Full reconnection of Papakiri Stream, in its current state of high nutrient levels, is likely to cause substantial deterioration in Tutira Lake water quality.

5.4. Partial reconnection of Papakiri Stream, so high flows are prevented from entering the Lake, would also risk further water quality deterioration. This risk would not be as severe as a full reconnection. If phosphorus levels in Papakiri Stream were decreased by approximately 50%, there would be a neutral risk with this low-flow only proposal.

5.5. The current situation of Papakiri Stream overtopping the stop banks and entering Tutira Lake is providing infrequent but large pulses of nutrient to the lake, and may have contributed to some of the observed phytoplankton blooms.

6. Based on modelling to date, management options likely to improve the health of Tutira Lake include:

6.1. Systems to capture nutrient loads during flood events, such as peak runoff control structures/sediment traps being proposed as part of the Te Mana O Te Wai project.

6.2. Amending existing stop banks or channel design of the Papakiri Stream diversion, so that high flows are completely prevented from entering the Lake.

6.3. Artificial destratification. In the short term, this is an option that is likely to significantly reduce the risk of cyanobacterial blooms. Preventing stratification would also prevent conditions that caused the recent fish kills.

7. Feasibility and cost/benefit analysis for the above management options are under investigation and are a focus of further modelling.

Decision Making Process

8. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Environment and Services Committee receives the Lake Tutira Science Update report.

Steve Cave

Manager

Open Space Development

Andy Hicks

Team Leader

Water Quality and Ecology

Dr Stephen Swabey

Manager

Science

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management

Mike Adye

Group Manager

Asset Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 09 March 2016

Subject: Resource Use Update

Reason for Report

1. This report provides an overview of activities performed by the Resource Use section of the Resource Management Group.

Background

2. The Resource Use section of the Resource Management Group is responsible for the following functions:

2.1. Compliance Monitoring

2.2. Pollution Response

2.3. Enforcement

2.4. Navigational Safety

2.5. Hazardous Wastes and Substances

3. There are 9 full time staff employed with an additional 2 part time that fulfill the roles of Deputy Harbourmaster.

4. Compliance Monitoring:

4.1. There are a total of 2,576 resource consents that are monitored every year. 1979 of those are electronically monitored via telemetered reporting. 597 require physical visits to sites for monitoring inspections and subsequent report writing.

4.2. Of the 597 consents physically monitored so far this year, a total of 95% have been deemed compliant. The remainder, totaling 29, have later achieved compliance through working with the consent holder [on 27 occasions] or been dealt with through enforcement action [1 x prosecution and 1 x infringement fine].

5. Pollution Response

5.1. 6 Resource Use staff carry out pollution response duties and operate a duty roster where a 24/7 pollution response function is provided.

5.2. YTD, there have 433 reported pollution incidents that have been investigated. This is on track to be at a similar rate to recent years where the number of reports has been in the mid 600’s.

5.3. Consistently, the largest number of reports relate to air pollution. Those complaints mainly relates to odour, smoke and spray drift.

6. Enforcement:

6.1. There have been 3 prosecutions initiated this year, 1 relating to navigational safety, 1 relating to a discharge from commercial premises into the inner harbour and 1 relating to odour. The odour prosecution is awaiting trial while the other 2 have resulted in convictions.

6.2. To date, there have been 16 infringement fines issued. Infringement fines are able to be issued in lieu of prosecution action in situations that are not serious enough to warrant a court case and/or can be resolved quickly.

6.3. Abatement notices are legal orders to undertake or stop an activity that has or could have an adverse effect on the environment and we have issued 6 this year.

7. Navigational Safety:

7.1. The Regional Council has legal responsibility for Navigational Safety within Hawke’s Bay waters and is essentially broken down into commercial and recreational functions.

7.2. The Regional Harbourmaster and his 2 Deputies work closely with the Napier Port and those associated with the Port is ensuring the Port and approaches are operated safely.

7.3. Recreational users are largely engaged via navigational safety education programmes. These are delivered formally through a school programme, via Honorary Boating Officers in the community and a close partnership with Coastguard. The Harbourmaster also visits boat ramps and recreational areas like Pandora Pond, to spread the navigational safety message.

8. Hazardous Waste and Substances:

8.1. We currently employ a Hazardous Wastes Advisor, who will retire later this year.

8.2. The bulk of his time is taken up with the collection and disposal of unwanted agrichemicals. These are largely disposed of, at Council cost on behalf of commercial interests. HBRC is the only Regional Council that undertakes and pays for this activity on their own.

9. Matters of interest:

9.1. The stockpile of end of life tyres at Whakatu

9.1.1. This is a problem nationally; while we have served an abatement notice on the owner of the Whakatu pile, to remove them, in reality there is no readily available way for them to do that. No other regions want similar collections of tyres and there is a need for some national leadership on this issue so they can be easily relocated or disposed of in an acceptable manner. Our staff have joined staff from other councils in a special interest group to engage with central government in the hope something can be achieved.

9.1.2. At Whakatu, the pile is being slowly removed through exporting to India. That progress will be slowed over the fruit export season through a scarcity of available containers but will pick up again after containers become available.

9.2. Municipal wastewater treatment plants at Waipukurau and Waipawa.

9.2.1. Central Hawke’s Bay District Council still have problems with these 2 plants in terms of the treatment process and the size capacity of their ponds.

9.2.2. We are engaged in very serious discussions with them in an effort to find a final solution. Further enforcement has been contemplated and is still an option should CHBDC waiver in their stated intention to adequately address the issues.

9.2.3. They have applied for a change to their resource consent that, if successful, will address the Ammoniacal Nitrogen issue but they still have problems with controlling E coli and soluble reactive phosphorus.

9.3. Waihi River Dam

9.3.1. Damage was caused to the dam gates during a storm event in September 2015 with the result of significant sediment being discharged into the Waihi Stream and Waiau River.

9.3.2. Work is being carried out, by the dam owners, to regain control of the dam and any sediment discharge.

9.3.3. This has been a long and frustrating process having 2 distinct components.

9.3.4. The first being the control of the sediment discharge and repair of the dam.

9.3.5. The second, the compliance investigation to determine if there is any liability attached to the sediment discharge. The investigation is still being undertaken and the outcome of that will be made public.

9.4. Te Mata Mushroom Company odour issues:

9.4.1. The company was prosecuted for the discharge of offensive and objectionable odour beyond their boundary and a not guilty hearing is set for 18 April 2016.

9.4.2. Discussions are continuing with the company on a way to continue operating through the application for and granting of an appropriate new resource consent.

Decision Making Process

10. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Environment and Services Committee receives and notes the Resource Use Update report.

Wayne Wright

Manager

Resource Use

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

Item	Topic	Councillor / Staff
1.
2.
3.