Agenda of Environment and Services Committee

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 21 February 2018

Subject: Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy Implementation – Ecosystem Prioritisation

Reason for Report

1. To provide the Environment and Services Committee with an update on ecosystem prioritisation, which is one of the six priority actions identified in the Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Action Plan 2017-2020 (the Action Plan).

Background

2. Ecosystem-based conservation, as opposed to species-based, has become the mainstream approach to protect indigenous biodiversity. At the heart of this approach is maintaining and restoring a full range of remaining natural habitats and ecosystems. It focuses on habitat and ecosystems as a means of conserving species, diversity and processes within them. This recognises that, by focusing on ecosystems we should maintain viable populations of indigenous species across their natural range.

3. Hawke’s Bay region has approximately 500,000 ha of indigenous ecosystem areas remaining today. It is unrealistic to aim for protecting and restoring all of the remaining indigenous habitats and ecosystems immediately, in terms of time and resources needed to do so. This is the underlining driver for the current project - ecosystem prioritisation which will inform where to invest scarce resources in the next 10, 20 and 30 years for the best chance of achieving the outcomes sought.

4. The process of ecosystem prioritisation consists of four stages:

4.1. Data preparation for Zonation, including the terrestrial ecosystem mapping (delivered by an external consultant)

4.2. Zonation analysis (delivered by an external consultant)

4.3. Refinement and interpretation of Zonation output (primarily delivered in-house with support from partner agencies and local experts)

4.4. Development of management prescription for each site (initially facilitated by an external consultant and predominantly delivered in-house with support from partner agencies and local experts).

5. We are at the ‘Refinement and interpretation’ stage, and this paper reports on the process and outputs so far.

Potential terrestrial ecosystem mapping

6. The region was mapped for potential ecosystem types (i.e. pre-human inhabitation) using the latest ecosystem classification system developed by the Department of Conservation. Classification is based on climate and soil (including substrates and susceptibility to waterlogging), but also takes into account a known influence of volcanic (and glacial, if present) activities. A range of other existing documentations were deployed to create a comprehensive spatial layer of the ecosystem pattern.

7. The resulting map shows the pattern of terrestrial ecosystems that should occur under certain environmental conditions. 61 potential ecosystems types are mapped.

8. This base layer was intersected with the Land Cover Database (LCDB 4.0) and indigenous land cover types were extracted to estimate the remaining areas of each ecosystem type.

9. There are approximately 500,000 ha of indigenous terrestrial areas left in the region, which includes 58 ecosystems types. 22 of these ecosystems are threatened (less than 30% of original area left), mostly of lowland forest types, coastal and dune vegetation types, braided riverbed vegetation, and wetlands. Three ecosystem types were presumed extinct (one lowland forest type, one coastal herbfield type, and one wetland type) whose historic extents were very small.

Types of rivers and lakes present in the region

10. Hawke’s Bay’s rivers and lakes are broadly characterized as below, using the national dataset Freshwater Ecosystem of New Zealand (FENZ);

10.1. Our 22,566 km of rivers and streams consist of 33 river ecosystem types.

10.2. Our 125 lakes are divided into three geomorphic types (landslide, riverine, and shoreline). There are 130 dams/reservoirs that sustain deep open water systems. The total area of deep open water ecosystem (i.e. lake area) is approximately 7,400 ha.

Zonation – systematic conservation planning tool

11. Zonation is undertaken using a software tool that prioritises ecosystem or habitat sites based on their representation (i.e. ecosystem types for terrestrial and rivers, and geomorphic types for lakes), conditions and connectivity.

12. Zonation-based prioritisation has been adopted by a number of regional councils, including Auckland, Bay of Plenty, Greater Wellington, and Waikato. The tool was also used for Department of Conservation’s prioritisation on public conservation land.

13. It requires ‘a cap’ in which it produces the best set of sites to achieve full representation. It is generally an area-based cap which is set by asking ‘of the remaining indigenous ecosystems, how much area can we manage within a given timeframe?’

14. For the Hawke’s Bay, we have set the cap of 30% (of the 500,000 ha of indigenous areas remaining) by 2050. The principle behind the 30% is the species-area curve, i.e. when habitat (or a population) is reduced to 20% of the original extent (or a population), the rate of species loss is exponentially accelerated. Therefore 30% was chosen as a reasonable target that balances species response with achievability and affordability.

15. The scope of the Zonation prioritisation included terrestrial ecosystems (including wetlands and braided riverbeds), and lakes and rivers. Three sets of rankings were made for these ecosystem domains, which required three different datasets. For terrestrial ecosystems, primarily a regional dataset was used which included the potential ecosystem layer (as explained above), logging history data and indicative pest distribution data. For the rivers and lakes, the national dataset FENZ was used, which contains stream and lake types (as described above) and freshwater conditions.

16. Although ranking was done separately for the three ecosystem domains, ranking of terrestrial ecosystems reflects the connectivity with lakes and/or rivers. For example, if there are two sites representing the same ecosystem type, but one intersects with high-ranked streams and the other doesn’t, Zonation will rank the former higher as it would account for the connectivity of the terrestrial ecosystem with the river ecosystem.

Zonation output and interpretation

17. Zonation identified 900 terrestrial sties (150,000 ha), 10,034 segments of rivers (6,700 km), and 77 lakes (1,700 ha) as the priority 30%. These sites/segments represent a full range of ecosystem types that are present in the region.

18. 529 of the 900 priority terrestrial sites are less than 10 ha in size. Many of these small sites represent threatened ecosystem types whose remnants are becoming scarce, small and fragmented.

19. Interpretation of the Zonation output has been done in collaboration with local experts with ecological and site knowledge, and involves verification of the ecosystem types and reviewing the boundaries indicated by the Zonation. Where expert knowledge or information doesn’t exist, the sites were labelled as ‘ground-truthing required’.

20. To date, over 200 hours of contribution by DOC and HBRC staff, and Biodiversity Strategy Implementation Planning Group members have been spent on interpreting and refining the terrestrial ecosystem sites ranking. This process is still underway (85% complete).

21. The ranking of terrestrial ecosystem sites takes into account the connectivity to rivers and lakes. Many of the top 30% terrestrial sites adjoin to, or contain highly ranked river segments and lakes. Given the very large volume of river segment and lake sites which are ranked top 30%, staff propose that they do not review river/lake sites individually. If significant values associated with river/lake sites that are not currently associated with the top 30% terrestrial ecosystem sites, they will be added.

22. As with any modelling tool, Zonation has limitations which need to be considered in the decision making process. Examples of the limitations include the prioritisation framework on lakes, including the following issues:

22.1. Lack of a regional dataset for conditions of lakes

22.2. Lack of a regional dataset for degree of threats towards lakes

22.3. The limitation of the area-based cap, which discourages larger lakes such as Waikaremoana from being ranked higher

Using ecosystem prioritisation to achieve the Biodiversity Strategy outcomes

23. Ecosystem-based site prioritisation is a critical first step to achieving the Biodiversity Strategy objectives and outcomes of sustaining, protecting, and improving the full representation of native species and habitats.

24. Ecosystem prioritisation will form part of the informed conversation and decision making by the Biodiversity Guardians of HB and the HB Biodiversity Trust who drive the Action Plan and manage funding for biodiversity projects in the region.

25. The Biodiversity bid for the LTP 2018-28 includes $200k p.a. to fund operations on the ground, that is for protection or restoration work on identified sites (the bid also includes $200k for endowment growth, and $150k for a Biodiversity Strategy Project Manager). Operating expenditure of $40k for outcome monitoring is also proposed in a Science budget code. This funding will be dedicated to sites that are prioritised through this process.

26. It is critical that operational funding is available in year 1 of the LTP 2018-28, for a range of strategic reasons:

26.1. Some priority sites and ecosystem sites are on the brink of extinction, and need immediate action

26.2. Projects on the ground will keep up momentum generated through Action Plan development

26.3. Projects on the ground are essential to win hearts and minds in the community

26.4. Evidence of successful projects help when seeking new funding.

Application of the ecosystem prioritisation to inform other council activities

27. The ecosystem prioritisation framework could inform other council programmes, and contribute to achieving multiple outcomes.

28. The ecosystem prioritisation framework will become an integral part of integrated catchment management being proposed through the draft Long Term Plan. Priority sites that are identified in catchments of interest could also be part of the solution to address issues such as soil erosion, sediment production, and water quality. This is because these remnants are providing ecosystem services such as soil conservation and water retention, at a varying degree depending on the their condition. These remnants are also proof that the ecosystem is resilient to the condition of the site, and could be capitalized upon by afforestation as part of integrated catchment management.

29. Landscape-scale predator controls will be targeted most appropriately where priority ecosystem sites occur. Small, fragmented priority sites would particularly benefit from wide-scale predator control in conjunction with site-specific actions (e.g. fencing) as gains are larger when pressure from pest plants and animals are reduced in the surrounding landscape as well as within the sites. An initial analysis shows that around 350 of the 900 priority ecosystem sites would receive predator control from the first 8 years of Predator Free Hawke’s Bay implementation should it proceed.

30. The Engineering section’s Ecological Management and Enhancement Plan (EMEP) is currently targeted at the braided river systems in the region. A large part of their management footprint and adjacent lands contain some of the priority ecosystem sites. Their enhancement effort could be aligned and targeted at such sites to deliver multiple outcomes. Some of the existing enhancement work under the EMEP already coincides with priority ecosystem sites (e.g. Tukituki River mouth).

Next steps

31. We will continue interpretation of terrestrial sites identified by Zonation in partnership with DOC and with contributions from local experts from the Biodiversity Implementation Planning Group (IPG) members.

32. We will focus on terrestrial biodiversity sites in terms of data interpretation, given that most highly ranked river segments and lakes are contained or connected with the top 30% terrestrial sties.

33. It is also likely that a prescribed management plan for a terrestrial site containing/ adjoining rivers and lakes will improve the health of aquatic systems, given the connectivity of land and water. Should there be any specific actions needed to improve health of aquatic ecosystems, these will be integrated as part of the management approaches.

34. It is proposed to develop management prescriptions using the process and database template developed by an external consultant for the Bay of Plenty Regional Council in collaboration with DOC (BOP conservancy). Their process and templates enable users to identify key actions and estimate costs for those management actions.

35. We will be developing management prescriptions for up to 100 priority sites (out of 900) of various ecosystem types across the region. This exercise would be facilitated by an external consultant with participation from HBRC, DOC and local experts. Once the process and database template are set up, management prescriptions for the rest of the priority sites will be predominantly delivered in-house with support from partner agencies and local experts.

Decision Making Process

36. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Environment and Services Committee receives and notes the “Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy Implementation – Ecosystem Prioritisation” staff report.

Authored by:

Keiko Hashiba

Terrestrial Ecologist

Approved by:

Dr Stephen Swabey

Manager Science

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 21 February 2018

Subject: Science Monitoring Network Review

Reason for Report

1. To outline the recent comprehensive review undertaken of HBRC’s Environmental Monitoring Network (EMN), and identifies the key findings.

Background

2. HBRC operates an environmental monitoring network in part to fulfil its responsibilities under s35 of the Resource Management Act 1991 to monitor the State of the Environment (SOE), and also to provide data for other functions undertaken such as flood risk management, which are driven by other legislation such as the Soil and Rivers Control Act 1941.

3. The EMN is reviewed periodically in part or in total by external parties to ensure the network remains fit for its purposes, and was reviewed recently to inform staff of any network design issues ahead of the development of the Long Term Plan.

4. HBRC operates environmental monitoring networks (EMNs) in six domains – groundwater, surface water, coastal, ecology (including land, freshwater, and coastal), land and air/climate.

5. Our EMNs are developed and operated to provide long-term records of environmental variables such as rainfall, river flow, nutrient flux, riverine algal cover, marine water quality and habitats, groundwater quality/quantity and air quality.

6. Data may be collected from individual sites in each network very frequently (e.g. every few minutes with climate stations or river stations) or quite infrequently (e.g. 2-yearly with estuary habitat surveys).

7. Data from EMN’s are used to identify state and trends in the six key domains. Monthly reports are issued for temperatures, rainfall, river flow, groundwater, soil moisture, lightning strikes, recreational water quality and the climate outlook. Annual summary reports are published for the state of all the domains. Five year reports detail long-term trends in those domains.

8. EMN data are subsequently used by HBRC as key information for other activities such as policy development, for example for TANK; for monitoring compliance with National Environmental Standard’s; and for the design and operation of flood management schemes.

9. Data from our EMNs are also used by a wide range of stakeholders through our website, through the LAWA website, and through data feeds taken directly from our online databases.

10. As land-use activities, recreational activities and available technologies change over time, HBRC modifies its EMNs to ensure they continue to meet its needs, and the needs of its communities and stakeholders.

11. The review just completed considered how well the EMNs meet HBRC’s objectives and targets. It examines the costs associated with existing EMNs and likely future costs. It identifies that collecting data from EMNs is not enough – the data must be shared readily with communities and stakeholders. Finally, it notes the need for transparency and quality control in data collection and dissemination.

12. The consultants undertaking the review consulted widely with HBRC teams and with external stakeholders about what matters they wished to see included in our EMNs.

13. The general conclusions of the report include:

13.1. HBRC’s EMNs should be designed to suit its strategic goals, and their benefits should be considered against their costs

13.2. EMN design should focus on integrated catchment management, with a minor focus on hotspots and emerging issues

13.3. Mātauranga Māori and citizen science should be included in EMNs, and resourced to improve data robustness and management

13.4. Data should be made more accessible from HBRC’s website

13.5. Compliance data could be integrated into databases for EMNs, with appropriate quality checking and flags to identify its source

13.6. Annual report cards, rather than full annual SOE reports, could be produced

13.7. Plan Effectiveness Reporting should be updated

13.8. Metrics for social, cultural and economic aspects of resource management could be developed to track resource use, revenue generated, and ratepayer satisfaction

13.9. Time could be given to integrating HBRC EMNs with other agencies’ EMNs, to avoid duplication

13.10. Outside advice, such as an advisory panel, could be used to improve communication of HBRC data and analyses with communities and stakeholders

14. Specific conclusions of the report with respect to individual domains include the following:

14.1. Lysimeters could be mothballed, since they are less effective than other methods

14.2. Short-term weather/climate sites could be extended through time, to provide more long-term coverage

14.3. River sites used for both hydrology and water quality and ecology could be better aligned to be the same site. The same analysis for groundwater quality and groundwater quantity networks could be undertaken.

14.4. Continuous monitoring of groundwater quality is now feasible, and this could focus on nitrate as a key analyte. Other analytes such as arsenic could be routinely monitored. Event-based monitoring could take place, and more work on stygofauna and troglofauna could be undertaken. Water quality may need more monitoring in smaller aquifers

14.5. Groundwater quantity (level) monitoring could include more telemetered sites, to reduce maintenance costs, and further monitoring could take place in smaller aquifers

14.6. Coastal water quality sites could be aligned with other monitoring locations, and focus more on specific issues, now that the general baseline has been established for Hawke Bay

14.7. Citizen science has significant potential in the water quality and ecology (WQE) team’s work, and this could be developed further.

14.8. Land science could focus more on land use management practices, and land use change, and move away from synoptic work that has established the existing baselines

14.9. Biodiversity and biosecurity monitoring networks could be established to provide baseline data for these work programmes

14.10. Alignment of various EMNs could be improved both to focus on policy priorities and to identify and assess linkages between land, water and coastal domains

14.11. Reserve funding for emerging issue investigations is important in all domains

14.12. Gradual upgrading of air quality monitoring equipment could allow for higher spatial resolution understanding of problems

Next Steps

15. Some of the actions suggested as part of the EMN review have already been undertaken as part of existing work programmes in a variety of budgets. For example, annual report cards are now produced in lieu of reports, for the State of the Environment annual reporting (project 153).

16. Other suggested actions have been incorporated into the Long Term Plan, including a move to Integrated Catchment Management approaches and integration of citizen science and Mātauranga Māori.

17. An initial scan of the recommendations has not revealed anything that required immediate change or was of likely immediate significant cost. Some recommendations had been anticipated (moving to greater use of telemetry for example) and are included within the current LTP.

18. The further analysis and cross council discussion required for some of the suggested actions is underway. If any small changes to funding are required, these will be brought into the Annual Plan in future years. Some initiatives may occur over several years, and may be funded as part of the next Long Term Plan.

Decision Making Process

19. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Environment and Services Committee receives and notes the “Science Monitoring Network Review” staff report.

Authored by:

Dr Stephen Swabey

Manager Science

Approved by:

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 21 February 2018

Subject: February 2018 Hot Spot/Freshwater Improvement Projects Update

Reason for Report

1. To provide an update on progress on the Freshwater Improvement/Hotspots environmental projects.

Background

2. The environmental ‘Hot Spot’ funding of $1m is to accelerate action on six hot spots during 2017/2018.

Ahuriri	Tukituki	Karamu	Marine	Tutira (FIF)	Whakaki (FIF)
$200,000	$100,000	$150,000	$150,000	$200,000 4 years	$200,000 5 years

Freshwater Improvement Fund: Lake Tūtira (Te Waiū oTūtira, The Milk of Tūtira), HBRC partnership with Maungaharuru-Tangitū Trust

3. MfE is reviewing our final stage two application for the Freshwater Improvement Fund. All going well we expect to start this project before March 2018. We cannot start working on our project until the Deed is signed.

4. A strong partnership between HBRC and Maungaharuru-Tangitū Trust continues. We have been working closely throughout this process; drafting and finalising the work programme and this years’ annual plan.

5. Everything is in place to start. Our first tasks will be; the development and implementation of our project health and safety plans. A Governance Group meeting within the first month, and our contractor will start work on the Integrated Catchment Management Plan.

6. Total project costs: $3,345,264

6.1. FIF contribution $1,557,781

6.2. HBRC contribution $1,732,483

6.3. Maungaharuru-Tangitū Trust contribution $76,000

7. The table below outlines a brief description of the activities within the project including the deliverable timeframes and costs.

Deliverables	Overview	$	Year(s)
Integrated Catchment Management Plan	Work with the community to understand their vision/aspirations for the catchment. Identify other agency initiatives and coordinate for better decisions made about land use, water resources and infrastructure within the Lake Tutira catchment with the overarching objective of improving the Mauri and water quality of Lake Tutira.	$50k	2018
Farm Environmental Management Plans	Working with the community to establish farm environmental management plans. These will include some general farm information, identification of environmental risks, recorded good management practices and actions for improvement.	$63k	2018-2019
Farmer Incentive / Subsidy Scheme	To assist and encourage the implementation of Farm Environmental Management Plans, a funding scheme for landowners will be established for land action improvements (planting, fencing etc.	$500k	2018-2021
Papakiri Stream Low Flow Connection	Re-connection of the Papakiri Stream, low flow only. The low flow connection will allow 50% of the flow of Papakiri into the lake, while restricting flows during heavy rain events, which transport sediment.	$66k	2018
Diversion Strengthening (Papakiri Stream)	This work is proposed in conjunction with the Papakiri low flow connection work above, but can be considered a standalone initiative. Strengthening of the existing diversion embankment through reconstructing, raising and lengthening the 1,000m stop bank. This will reduce the over flow of water into the lake during heavy rain events which normally transports sediment adding to the legacy issue.	$49.5k	2018
Lake Tutira Air Curtain	Aeration bubbler to be constructed and installed into Lake Tūtira. The aeration is to address legacy nutrient levels within the sediment in the bottom of the lake, and stabilise the water column reducing frequency of algae blooms.	$300k	2018
Southern Outlet	Strong community desire to see an outlet connection between Waikopiro Lake and Lake Orakai at the southern end of the Lake complex. It has the potential to change the flow and direction of currents within the lakes creating a longitudinal flow. And viable fish passage into the lakes, which will improve mauri within the lakes.	$687k	2021
Tūtira Regional Park Sediment Traps	Sediment traps constructed on Tutira Regional Park sub-catchments Kahikanui and Te Whatu Whewhe.	$507k	2018-2019
Monitoring site equipment construct and upgrade Capex and regime	New telemetered flow site and WQ equipment installed on Papakiri Stream, plus upgrades for the new buoy in Tūtira and the installation of the old Tūtira buoy into Waikōpiro. A monitoring programme to measure effectiveness of works implemented and inform future action. When the buoys are in place real time monitoring for oxygen, temperature and chlorophyll a. With monthly monitoring for water samples.	$409k	2018
MTT Cultural Health Index Monitoring	A cultural monitoring programme will be developed, to measure mauri and the effectiveness of the activities implemented, also building hapū capacity in monitoring.	$64k	2018-2021
Riparian Enhancement of Lake Tūtira	On-going planting around Lake Tūtira	$76k	2018
Project Management role	Across the life of the project (4 years).	$468.5k	2018-2021
Land Services Advisor	Position to coordinate and draft ICPM and implement as well as coordination of FEMP drafting and implementation.	$144k	2018-2021
Health and Safety, Communication + admin costs.	Communications, promotion, community engagement, Koha. Project Health and Safety plans.	$21k	2018-2021
	Total	$3.35m

Freshwater Improvement Fund: Whakaki Lake (Sunshine, wetlands and bees will revitalise the taonga of Whakaki), HBRC partnership with Whakaki Lake Trust

8. MfE is reviewing our final stage two application for the Freshwater Improvement Fund. This included our work programme and a detailed annual plan for the first year, and supporting documentation for two new deliverables added into our application.

9. During this stage two process, the Whakaki Lake flooded surrounding farmland, as it does most years, causing an increase in nutrient leaching, reduced production and very high tensions among the community. Discussions with the community highlighted the priority need for a solution to manage the water levels of the lake.

10. These discussions re-shaped our FIF deliverables to include the construction of an adjustable weir in the Rahui Channel, and the alignment of the Waikatuku Stream. The weir is a key structure that will help bring certainty around water level management at critical times of the year. It will help make opening decisions faster and avoid flooding while retaining enough water in the lake during spring openings. Detailed water level management plans, including weir levels, are to be developed with the stakeholders as part of this project when started.

11. The alignment of the Waikatuku Stream will help reduce fresh inputs of sediment from the catchment into the lake, as it will redirect the flow of the Waikatuku Stream towards the opening end of the Rahui Channel, rather than directly into the lake. The weir and stream alignment will work in partnership with the weir, as the lip of the weir will facilitate even more sedimentation, such that when the lake is opened to the sea via the Rahui channel, it will flush sediment that has accumulated there rather than in the lake.

12. These new deliverables added an estimate of $500k to our project costs. This required us to analyse our budget and find savings without compromising on our objectives. It also made us look for other potential income sources.

13. Through MPI’s Regional Growth fund, we have submitted an application for $100k to cover planting and fencing for the Manuka establishment. MPI are supportive of our application and we expect to hear the outcome from our submission in the coming weeks. We have also secured $50k as a contribution from Land Management to align the stream this financial year. While further research into specific project costs have provided savings and enabled us to meet all the costs for our deliverables.

14. Currently there are different agency work streams in either progress, or being proposed. This is a potential risk where the community could become overwhelmed by the amount of activity and disengage completely. To mitigate this we are working closely with the Whakaki Catchment Group, to establish inter-agency work stream alignment towards the community’s aspirations. This also provides an opportunity share knowledge and build our relationships, while establishing a consistent approach for the community.

15. Dr. Simone Langhans, a scientist from Germany is revisiting us through the Marie-Sklodowska-Curie Fellow. Simone will be here to design a multi-criteria decision making tool, which combines individual and collective value judgements to be combined with scientific understanding to produce a transparent decision support tool. She will focus on 'water level management' for the weir. This will include what needs to go in the consent for how lake openings and weir configurations be managed.

16. Also, a visiting Agricultural Engineering student Cindy Asmat, from Peru, has experience with solar irrigation and will help us investigate and refine operating parameters of the recirculating wetland this financial year.

17. Total project costs: $3,273,310

17.1. FIF contribution $1,605,404

17.2. HBRC contribution $1,548,905

17.3. Fish and Game $15,000

17.4. MPI $100,000

18. The table below outlines a brief description of the activities within the project including the deliverable timeframes and costs.

Deliverables	Overview	Total Cost	Year(s)
Weir	A weir will be built to better manage water levels and ease the decision making process of lake opening in the spring. This activity will have to get support from the Community via a Resource Consent including a Management plan for the structure.	$400k	2018-2019
Recirculating wetland	A recirculating wetland will be able to artificially skim the fine layer of sediment and bacteria sitting on the lake floor and export it on the land. This filtering system should recirculate the entire lake water body in one year.	$768k	2018-2022
Manuka plantation	80 Hectares of Manuka plantation established, including some fencing will be established. Establishing Manuka plantations will provide a source of income to help sustain the initiatives developed through this project. There will be some fencing	$274,k	2018-2022
Rahui Fencing	Fencing for stock exclusion from the Rahui Channel and installing water troughs for cattle.	$53k	2018-2019
Refurbish Whakaki Lake School	The refurbishment of the Whakaki School and reopened as a centre for cultural and ecological learning. Ecotourism and learning opportunities at Whakaki will expand.	$200k	2018 & 2019
Waikatuku alignment	The Waikatuku alignment will redirect the flow of the Waikatuku Stream towards the opening end of the Rahui Channel. This will divert upstream sediment away from the Lake and towards the sea.	$100k	2018
Soil conservation plantings	$24k per year across the life of the project.	$120k	2018-2022
Water monitoring	A robust monthly water quality-monitoring regime, testing nine varying points in and around the Lake and tributaries.	$211.6k	2018-2022
Bird monitoring		$15k	2018-2022
Tree maintenance		$120k	2019-2022
Forced closure trial	Forced closure trials used until the weir has built, to make sure the lake is not empty after a spring opening.	$40k	2018 & 2019
Public access to Lake	At least one entrance point to the lake will be developed and beautified, including new signage installed.	$20k	2019-2020
Honey strain testing		$5k	2018-2022
Community Engagement	Facilitated pakeke hui, facilitated Hui a Iwi, community day Development of a blog Whakaki Catchment Group – public presentations	$68k	2018-2022
Project Management role & Facilitator role		$557k	2018-2022
Admin Costs / legal fees/ IT costs/		$136k	2018-2022
	Total	$3.27m

Hot Spot: Tukituki River

Tukituki $100k	Project Lead	6,167 plants (approx.)	1.57km fencing
$69k Makirikiri restoration	Nicola McHaffie	2,200	530m
$29.5k Hunt wetland	Joanne Hales	3,967	40m
$1.5k Flood fencing demonstration	Brendan Powell		1km

19. The Makirikiri restoration project, just outside of Takapau, is a demonstration site for riparian management, for engaging the local community and aligning regional water quality objectives with wider manawhenua values.

20. We have completed the first round of weed control including the removal of over-mature willow trees and other weeds infestations. Contracts are underway for the fencing, further weed control, planting and installation of the path. A whakawaatea hosted by the local marae is scheduled for the 11February with councillors from both HBRC and CHBDC attending. Next steps; Works Group to begin site preparation for the limestone path and our fencing contractor will start erecting the fence over the next few days .Also we are to liaise with the marae and the community to round up volunteers.

21. Hunt wetland project is to restore a hectare of wetland, situated alongside the Takapau Ormondville Road, back to native plants. Currently this is area is in rank grass with minimal weed problems. The grass is long and dense so staged spot spraying is required to prepare for planting in the winter. Educational signage will be erected at the site to describe the plants and the water quality benefits of a wetland.

22. Flood fencing demonstration behind Craggy Range. This project will trial and demonstrate a flood fencing option for areas where permanent fencing are unsuitable and are repeatedly wiped out by floods. A fence has been installed at the site before and was wiped out during a flood. The new fence will use flexible fibreglass standards and biodegradable polywire.

Hot Spot: Te Whanganui-ā-Orotu (Ahuriri Estuary)

Ahuriri $200k. Project Lead: Anna Madarasz-Smith

$40k Ficopomatus removal

$20k Ahuriri Catchment Land Action Plan for

$80k Catchment works (plants 5,545, fencing 7.1km)

$60k Catchment Hydrology

23. Ficopomatus removal: To restore water flow between the upper and lower estuary, we (in partnership with Mana Ahuriri Trust) removed 219 tonnes of invasive marine tubeworm from the estuary.

24. The Ahuriri Catchment Land Action Plan for sediment and nutrient control identifies high erosion risk land within the catchment. (see summary attached).

25. Catchment works, identified through the Ahuriri Catchment Land Action Plan, focus on landslide erosion (the major long-term source of sediment) and streambank erosion (the regular and short-term source). We are implementing erosion control measures, establishing wetland and riparian filters and livestock exclusion from waterways.

26. Catchment Hydrology: Further research information is required to better define the water budget, movement and export in this complex and largely managed catchment. What are the contaminant pathways? How much healthy freshwater does the estuary need to function. This is being scoped.

Hot Spot: Te Karamū 2017-18

Karamū Project lead: Antony Rewcastle	10,725 plants 10,700 native / 25 exotic	1.65 km fencing	Budget $150k
06-00 Opaka, Karamū-Clive River	1000	155m	$12.5k
16-50 Brookvale wetland enhancement, Mangateretere Stream	8000	500m	$90k
29-00 Paki Paki enhancement, Hinetemoa Springs and Awanui Stream	1000	300m	$12.5k
35-00 Bridge Pa fencing, Karewarewa-Paritu Stream	25 Weeping willows	700m	$20k
40-00 Kahurānaki (Te Hauke) Marae planting	700	-	$15k

27. Opaka, Old Ngaruroro (Karamu-Clive) River, left bank above Whakatu Railway Bridge. Old man’s beard control completed. Silver poplar control in progress. Fencing for stock exclusion and revegetation planting to be completed.

28. Brookvale wetland – Mangateretere Stream. Protection and enhancement of the stream to exclude stock, improve water quality, habitat and biodiversity, and demonstrate best practice land management. Arboriculture work completed. Weed control in progress. Fencing and revegetation planting to be completed.

29. Paki Paki enhancement - Hinetemoa Spring, Awanui Stream. Protection and enhancement of the waterway to exclude stock and improve water quality, habitat and biodiversity for this culturally significant site, which is visible as the southern entrance to Heretaunga Plains. Fencing and revegetation enhancement planting in progress.

30. Paritua/Kārewarewa Stream enhancement, Bridge Pa. Protection and enhancement of the waterway to exclude stock and improve water quality on the Karewarewa-Paritua Stream, above Mangaroa Marae. Tree work to create fence alignment. Enhancement planting to be completed.

31. Kahurānaki (Te Hauke) Marae, Kahurānaki Stream. We will be working with representatives from the marae to produce plans weed control, enhancement planting on the tributary to Lake Poukawa and connection to biodiversity priority areas.

Hot Spot: Marine

32. Work with the Hawkes Bay Marine and Coastal Group (HBMAC) and other stakeholders to build understanding of our coastal environment by investigating subtidal habitats and improve our understanding of terrestrial impacts on the coastal environment by developing a hydrodynamic model of the bay.

Marine $150k	Project Leads
$40k Hydrodynamic model of Hawke Bay	Oliver Wade
$110k Collaborative study: Wairoa Hard	Anna Madarasz-Smith

33. A Collaborative study with NIWA, MPI and hapu looking at current state Wairoa Hard. This study will use the NIWA vessel Ikatere to undertake multibeam echo sounder to define the extent of hard substrate and potential habitats within the area. NIWA have committed $35k of vessel time to the study, Ministry for Primary Industries $25k, with the remaining $100k being funded by the HBRC Hotspot fund. This 14-day mapping study is scheduled for March/April 2018, with further work to be defined with PTSGs in the area.

34. HBRC are examining software options for building the hydrodynamic model. Consultants (Advisian) to the Port of Napier have used open source software (Deflt3D), and they have offered to provide the input bathymetry files, which will save model, build time if we decide to use Delft3D software to create the model. HBRC currently have a test version of the Delft3D software, which we can examine the Advisian files with. Despite being open source software, there are still costs associated with using Delft3D, with the best support option incurs a yearly cost of around $5,500.

35. The other option is to purchase an add-on module to our existing MikeZero software from Danish Hydraulic Institute (DHI). This has the advantage of continuity with other DHI models already in use at HBRC. There is a higher upfront cost with DHI software, however, as a regional council in New Zealand, DHI generally offer us a 50% discount in purchase price, which puts the software cost in the order of $35,000 plus an ongoing cost of around $7,000 per year for software upgrades and support. It is likely, but not tested yet, that the input files available from Advisian will be able to be converted to be used in the DHI models.

36. Hydrodynamic model: Once staff have decided on a model platform we need to establish:

36.1. Focus areas for the model

36.2. Establish boundary conditions

36.3. Develop a field sampling plan.

37. Focus areas: Cawthron Research Institute have been engaged to provide an initial assessment of water quality in Hawke’s Bay. They have analysed 15 years of satellite imagery focussing on proxies for chla, suspended sediment and sea surface temperature. This analysis is producing maps of mean concentrations and trends over time for these parameters, which will highlight problem areas within the Hawke’s Bay CMA.

38. Boundary conditions are the external forces that influence a model domain (waves; wind; currents; nutrient loads; suspended sediment etc.). Once staff have examined existing model platforms and the boundary conditions that have been used for these models we will have a better idea of what is available. There are also national level modelling initiatives being proposed that may be able to inform this.

39. Existing models use boundary conditions that are focussed on physical parameters (wind; waves etc.). Council staff have fostered a relationship with GNS and NIWA where they are collecting offshore water samples for us during scientific cruises to begin to inform understanding of the chemistry of the oceanic currents that influence Hawke’s Bay waters.

40. Once staff have received the offshore water quality analysis; the Cawthron satellite imagery analysis and had a chance to evaluate existing hydrodynamic models of the bay. A workshop will be held to develop a focussed sampling plan moving forward to inform the development of a hydrodynamic model.

Decision Making Process

41. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision-making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Environment and Services Committee receives and notes the “February 2018 Hotspot/Freshwater Improvement Funding Projects Update” staff report.

Authored by:

Te Kaha Hawaikirangi

Environmental Officer

Dr Andy Hicks

Team Leader/Principal Scientist - Water Quality and Ecology

Anna Madarasz-Smith

Senior Scientist - Coastal Quality

Peter Manson

Senior Land Management Advisor

Antony Rewcastle

Senior Open Space Development Officer

Jolene Townshend

Project Manager, Resource Management

Approved by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Resource Management

Attachment/s

⇩1	Summary for Ahuriri Catchment Action Plan
⇩2	Hot Spot Karamu and Tukituki Planting Plans 2018

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Services Committee

Wednesday 21 February 2018

Subject: Six Monthly Public Transport Update

Reason for Report

1. This report provides the Committee with an update on Council’s public transport operations.

Napier-Hastings Bus Service General Information

2. Napier Library has shifted to the MTG building. As many of our bus passengers use the library, we have worked with Napier City Council to establish a new bus stop near the library entrance and to publicise how to transfer from other routes for free, in order to access the library. The change seems to have run smoothly, with no complaints from passengers.

3. At the request of residents in Summerset Napier (in Greenmeadows), we are trialing the extension of Route 13 services to service the retirement village between 9am and 3pm. An informal bus stop has been established by Napier City Council, and patronage has been very encouraging. As the extension only operates off-peak, it adds little extra distance and is at minimal cost.

4. Bus services between Napier and Hastings continue to struggle with keeping to time due to roadworks and peak-time congestion in Hastings. This is an issue that may need a permanent solution, so we will investigate this through the review of the Regional Public Transport Plan. During February and March we place an extra bus into the fleet to run some overload services and help keep the scheduled services running to time.

5. As school children are a significant passenger group, we are running a campaign during February on how to get to school by GoBay bus service. Fliers are available on our website outlining the best services to take to each of the secondary schools from various parts of Hawke’s Bay, and this has been accompanied by radio advertising and Facebook posts.

District Health Board Travel Scheme

6. Following the success of its trial staff bus discount scheme, the District Health Board (DHB) has now further discounted fares for its staff in order to encourage travel behaviour change and reduce parking pressure at the hospital. This change took place on 1 February 2018 and we are hopeful that there will be a further increase on the approximately 500 staff trips taken each month. The patient travel scheme continues to be very successful, with a 100% increase in bus use over the last year.

New Bus Ticketing System

7. We are entering the final stages of implementation of a new bus ticketing system, as part of a consortium of nine regional councils. The new system will replace an ageing system with ticketing machines that are past the end of their useful lives, frequently break down and provide limited information.

8. The new system will provide accurate information about origin and destination of passengers. Customers will be able to top up smartcards online and this will considerably reduce the amount of cash carried on the buses. Eligibility for concession fares will be determined when smartcards are issued, removing the need for the driver to check eligibility each time the concession passenger travels, thereby improving loading times.

9. The changes will require a significant lead-in time with plenty of public information, to ensure that passengers are able to transition easily to the new system. As our system will not go live until 6 August and after six other councils, there will be time to learn from any unanticipated issues experienced by the other regions.

Review of Regional Public Transport Plan

10. We have commenced reviewing the Regional Public Transport Plan with a review of requests received for new public transport services or improvements. Issues such as late running on the Route 12 services and some minor policy changes will also be considered, and a revised draft will be brought to Council for consideration.

Bus Passenger Trips

11. Diagram 1 shows monthly bus passenger trips for the years 2012-13 to 2017-18. Bus numbers are down by 2% for the year to date. Decreases are noticeable on

11.1. Route 12 (Napier–Hastings-Napier via EIT and Pakowhai). These are the services which are struggling to keep to time.

11.2. Route 14 ( Napier- Maraenui- Onekawa-Napier)

11.3. Route 15 ( Napier –Westshore-Bayview-Napier )

11.4. Route 20 ( Hastings-Flaxmere-Hastings)

11.5. Route 21 ( Hastings-Havelock Nth –Hastings)

12. However, some services are growing well. There are significant increases in patronage on

12.1. Route 10 – Express service Napier-Hastings via Taradale (40% increase on last year)

12.2. Route 11 - Express Havelock North—Napier via Hastings and Clive (22% increase).

12.3. Route 16a (Hastings-Camberley-Raureka)

12.4. Route 13 – Napier- Tamatea- Taradale

12.5. Route 17 – Hastings-Parkvale-Akina

Diagram 1 – Monthly Passenger Trips to December 2012-13 to 2017-18

Bus Service Costs

13. The following diagram shows the net cost (after fares and excluding GST) of operating the goBay bus service for the six months to December for 2012-13 to 2017-18.

Diagram 3 – Six Month Net Cost (ex GST)

51% of this cost is met by the New Zealand Transport Agency).

14. We are now into the second year of operating the new contract with GoBus. Although still well within budget, indexation payments and lower fare revenue are responsible for the increase in net cost for the year to date. We are now paying about 2.5% of the gross contract cost in indexation each quarter, mainly due to labour and fuel cost increases.

Fare Recovery

15. Fare recovery is the portion of the total cost of the service that is covered by fares (including SuperGold payments from central government). The fare recovery rate is affected by the cost of the contract, including indexation, and the amount of revenue received from passengers and other sources.

Diagram 4– Fare Recovery Rate – 2012-13 to 2017-18.

2012-13	34.26%
2013-14	38.24%
2014-15	38.94%
2015-16	37.78%
2016-17	38.49%
2017-18	37.51% (YTD)

Total Mobility

16. The following tables compare the number of Total Mobility(TM) trips made for the year to date over the last five years, and the corresponding costs (excl. GST).

17. The number of TM trips taken for the year to date is fairly consistent with last year and showing a longer-term trend for growth. This is to be expected, as our population is not only increasing but also ageing at a faster rate than previously predicted.

Diagram 5 – Number of Total Mobility Trips to December for 2012-13 to 2017-18