Agenda of Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

10 November 2021

Subject: Biodiversity - Achieving Our Biodiversity Outcomes

Reason for Report

1. This item provides an overview of cross Council investment in biodiversity-related programmes and upcoming challenges in the biodiversity space that will potentially require resourcing through the 2024-34 Long Term Plan.

Executive Summary

2. The Global Biodiversity Crisis - The world is witnessing a large-scale degradation of nature, resulting in an unprecedented loss of species. Current global biodiversity trends indicate a rapid loss of both the area and the quality of natural ecosystems. The recent rapid loss of biodiversity suggests the planet is witnessing its sixth mass extinction wave, which is human-induced. Despite an increase globally in policies and actions to support biodiversity, biodiversity loss has worsened. On the current trajectory, it is predicted that approximately half of all species are at risk of extinction by the end of the century.

3. New Zealand is listed as the worst country in the world for many threatened species. More than 4000 species are currently threatened or at risk of extinction. The drivers behind biodiversity loss are multiple and complex of which no one entity can solve alone.

4. The Regional Council has a range of programmes that help protect or enhance our environment; however, most of these are focused on water quality. Few are aimed at addressing terrestrial or marine biodiversity decline. This item outlines those programmes that help protect and enhance biodiversity and the internal collaboration in delivering them.

Strategic Fit

5. Biodiversity is one of the four priority focus areas in the 2020-2025 Strategic Plan: Healthy, functioning and climate-resilient biodiversity. Kia ora, kia āhei, kia mārohirohi ā-āhuarangi hoki te rerenga rauropi.

6. There are four strategic goals.

6.1. By 2020, regional priority locations for ecosystem restoration - including in the coastal marine area - have been identified.

6.2. By 2030, key species and habitat (sites) are prioritised and under active restoration. Source: HB Biodiversity Strategy, 2015-2050 and Action Plan 2017-2020

6.3. By 2050, a full range of indigenous habitats and ecosystems, and abundance and distributions of taonga species are maintained and increased in every catchment in Hawke's Bay. Source: HB Biodiversity Strategy, 2015-2050 and Action Plan 2017-2020

6.4. By 2050, Hawke's Bay is predator free in line with NZ 2050 target. Source: PF2050

7. Climate change also impacts biodiversity. With many of our lowland ecosystems reduced to small, fragmented remnants with poor connectivity, they, and the species that live within them, are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change such as drought, fire, heavy rainfall and sea level rise.

8. Other plans that feed into Council’s biodiversity programmes are Hawke's Bay Biodiversity Strategy, Hawke's Bay Regional Pest Management Plan and the Asset Management Ecological Management and Enhancement Plan.

9. The Te Mana o te Taiao - Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy 2020 was launched in August 2020. An implementation plan for this strategy is currently being drafted, which the regional sector is feeding into. The National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity is due to go to cabinet mid-2022. Kotahi will see the Regional Policy Statement and Plan updated to give effect to the NPSIB and NPSFM. It will do this by including objectives, policies and rules which protect wetlands, give effect to Te Mana o te Wai, enable restoration projects and implementation of the Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy, and require territorial authorities to identify and protect SNAs.

Background

10. Indigenous biodiversity in New Zealand is in crisis. Around 4000 species are currently threatened or at risk of extinction. Many species continue to decline or are just hanging on. This includes biodiversity in the Hawke's Bay region, which has lost 77% of the original indigenous forest that once covered the region. Half the remaining forest types are categorised as threatened, with the greatest losses being lowland forest types.

11. The causes of biodiversity loss are multiple and complex. This loss is driven by pressures such as invasive species, land and sea use, direct exploitation of species, climate change, and pollution. Equally, not having suitable systems in place in terms of policy, legislation and leadership, not having enough knowledge or resources to act, and a disconnect between people and nature contribute to these direct pressures.

12. As shown in attachment one, the council has a range of programmes that help protect and enhance biodiversity. The success of these programmes is dependent on good internal communication and collaboration.

13. The following is an outline of some of these programmes.

14. Ecosystem Prioritisation programme – The focus of this programme is to secure remaining high biodiversity remnants in Hawke's Bay from extinction. The main works undertaken are deer fencing, pest plant and animal control and planting. It involves working closely with a large number of external agencies and stakeholders, such as QEII Trust, the rural sector and land occupiers.

15. Possum Control Area programme – This programme has arguably had the most significant biodiversity gains in Hawke's Bay. Although no formal monitoring was undertaken, there are a number of examples of native species, such as long tailed bats, whiteheads and numerous plant species, increasing, or recolonising areas post possum control. This programme currently relies on land occupiers to undertake control.

16. Site specific pests – This programme primarily supports land occupiers and community groups in undertaking pest control at sites of high biodiversity value through the provision of traps, engaging contractors and providing technical support.

17. Predator Free programme – There is currently 40,000ha in sustained mustelid control in Cape to City and Poutiri Ao o Tane. In addition, there is 14,500 ha, with possum eradication being undertaken on the Mahia peninsula. Predator control (possums, stoats, ferrets, weasels and feral cats) is a critical component in biodiversity recovery and was outlined in the parliamentary commissioner for the environments report "Taonga of an island nation: saving New Zealand birds" as one of the top three interventions for biodiversity recovery in New Zealand. The Predator Free programme is one of HBRC’s strategic goals. It will be a key initiative that directly drives biodiversity outcomes and enhances other HBRC and community investments into biodiversity.

18. Environmental pest plant programmes – A range of environmental plants, such as old man's beard, Japanese honeysuckle, wilding pines and Darwin's Barberry, are managed either at specified sites or region-wide to minimise their impacts on indigenous areas.

19. Erosion Control Scheme – The purpose of this scheme is to enable tree planting and other erosion control work to occur on those areas of land that are not for commercial planting purposes. The Erosion Control Scheme aims to reduce soil erosion, improve water quality, improve terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity through habitat protection and creation and provide community and cultural benefits through forest ecosystem services.

20. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Programme – The purpose of this fund is to provide accelerated on-ground action across five priority areas identified throughout the region – Ahuriri Estuary, Lake Tūtira, Lake Whakakī, Lake Whatumā and our Marine environment. A key focus of this work is to partner with the community and stakeholders to deliver high-value environmental outcomes on a catchment scale such as improved water quality, riparian protection, biodiversity enhancement, wetland development/ protection.

21. Open Spaces – Protect and enhance biodiversity throughout the Regional Park network by working with the community, tangata whenua, businesses and schools to undertake restoration plantings and predator and pest plant control. The Regional Park network is collectively over 1000 hectares (alongside 1200 hectares of forestry) and has several areas of high biodiversity value such as Pekapeka Regional Park wetlands, Tūtira Regional Park, Whittle Reserve and Waitangi Regional Park. The Open Spaces team supports restoration activities such as areas of the Karamu and Napier streams, which create important corridors to enhance urban biodiversity, or wetland creation and protection, helping create habitat for precious taonga such as tuna and inanga. Predator control programmes to protect endangered species such as Bittern, Black billed gull, and New Zealand dotterel, are undertaken by the community with support from the Catchment Services section.

22. Environmental Science – A variety of water quality and ecology monitoring programmes are undertaken across the region. This monitoring includes direct measurements of biodiversity (e.g. macroinvertebrate counts in rivers and phytoplankton counts in lakes) but mainly focuses on habitat quality and instream conditions supporting biodiversity. Reporting is focused on ecosystem health type metrics rather than specific biodiversity metrics.

22.1. The science team is also building its understanding of key environmental and ecological relationships that support the region's coastal resources. This includes the biodiversity that supports ecosystem services and functions, monitoring to determine the state of these resources, and how our activities may be impacting them. This knowledge supports decisions that improve the state of our natural resources so that they can function for generations to come and includes looking at the animals and plants that inhabit these environments.

23. Asset Management – has a range of programmes that seek to protect and increase the biodiversity values of flood protection assets (river, drainage). An example of this is the implementation work jointly undertaken with the Biodiversity Team to deliver the Ecological Management and Enhancement Plan, which includes shorebird surveys and the protection of high biodiversity remnants along the lower reaches of the Ngaruroro River. Another example is the biodiversity enhancement work undertaken as part of the stopbank upgrade project. The asset management group see this biodiversity work increasing and will require continued expertise within the regional council.

24. Policy - key policy mechanisms advocate for preserving and enhancing indigenous flora and fauna through statutory advocacy and strengthening regulatory settings through Kotahi. In addition to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater 2020 (NPSFM), which requires us to give effect to Te Mana o Te Wai and protect and restore wetlands, a National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB) is intended for release during this term of government. The main goal of the draft NPSIB was to maintain indigenous biodiversity through more consistent identification and protection of Significant Natural Areas (SNAs) by city and district councils.

24.1. Kotahi will see the Regional Policy Statement and Plan updated to give effect to the NPSIB and NPSFM. It will do this by including objectives, policies and rules which protect wetlands, give effect to Te Mana o te Wai, enable restoration projects and implementation of the Hawkes Bay Biodiversity Strategy, and require territorial authorities to identify and protect SNAs.

25. As shown in attachment two, Council also works with a large number of external agencies and stakeholders in delivering biodiversity programmes, such as the Department of Conservation, QEII Trust, Biodiversity Hawke's Bay, Forest and Bird, New Zealand Landcare Trust, Nga Whenua Rahui, Local Authorities, the rural sector, community groups and land occupiers.

Discussion

26. Council has a range of environmental programmes that help protect and enhance biodiversity, and teams within council collaborate well both internally and externally in delivering these. However, staff acknowledge they are not fully streamlined or at the scale required to halt biodiversity decline in Hawke's Bay. Like climate change, Biodiversity sits across multiple sections within Council. To maximise Council‘s investment in biodiversity, an internally facing biodiversity operational strategy is required to better coordinate these programmes and enhance their impact. Staff are early in the process towards the development of such a strategy.

27. Furthermore Council currently does not have a biodiversity monitoring programme in place therefore consistent, comprehensive information about biodiversity across the Hawke’s Bay region is not available. Without this information it is not possible to assess the impact our programmes may be having nor the progress we may be making in halting biodiversity decline.

28. Staff recently explored options for undertaking biodiversity outcome monitoring that could be implemented in Hawke’s Bay. Unfortunately, there is currently no consistent national approach in biodiversity outcome monitoring. HBRC staff, in partnership with the national Biodiversity Working Group, have led a Tier 2 Biodiversity Outcome Monitoring Programme review with the aim of generating consistency in how the Regional Sector monitor biodiversity. This programme is being piloted by a number of regional councils this summer and will likely undergo further refinement. The intent is to create a nationally consistent biodiversity outcome monitoring programme that can then be operationalised in Hawke’s Bay to produce meaningful information on regional biodiversity trends that can also be aggregated up and compared at a national level.

29. Further to this, the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity is intended for release during this term of government which may require the Regional Council to:

29.1. Work closely with Local Authorities in identifying, mapping and managing adverse effects to Significant Natural Areas

29.2. Identifying taonga species

29.3. Managing risks to highly mobile fauna

29.4. Support restoration and enhancement of SNAs

29.5. Amend our current Regional Biodiversity Strategy

29.6. Implement a regional biodiversity monitoring programme.

30. It is difficult to prepare for and accurately cost the likely resource implications of the NPS-IB for Council until the policy statement is released but given the above components that may affect council, it will likely require funding through the 2024-34 LTP.

31. As noted above, biodiversity is one of the four priority focus areas in the 2020-2025 Strategic Plan. However, with current investment we are unlikely to meet our 2030 (key species and habitat (sites) are prioritised and under active restoration) and 2050 (full range of indigenous habitats and ecosystems, and abundance and distributions of taonga species are maintained and increased in every catchment in Hawke's Bay) goals. As part of the development of an internal biodiversity operational strategy, a close look at the strategic plan goals and opportunities to fine tune existing programmes to assist in meeting these goals is essential. Ultimately this may lead to a structural change within Council.

Next Steps

32. There are currently a series of drivers at play that will influence both the resources and structure of Council’s investment in biodiversity. These include Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy 2020, the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity, Kotahi, the development of a Biodiversity Outcome Monitoring Programme, the review of the Possum Control Area programme, alongside community expectations.

33. Staff are working on the following actions.

33.1. Development of an internal biodiversity operational strategy that will allow us to better align work programmes across council to maximise the return on investment in biodiversity and to assist with meeting the Strategic Plan goals. It is acknowledged that the Strategic Plan goals are ambitious but prior to requesting any further resources it is essential that existing programmes are better aligned to enhance internal performance on biodiversity investment first. This is partially underway with a review in progress of the Ecosystem Prioritisation programme, as part of a wider grants policy review, that is going to combine the Erosion Control scheme, Ecosystem Prioritisation programme and the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Programme into one document. This will be presented to EICC in early 2022.

33.2. Continue to lead the development of a nationally consistent Tier 2 Biodiversity outcome monitoring programme with the intent of submitting a proposal to the 2024-34 LTP for a region-specific biodiversity monitoring programme.

33.3. Assessing the resource implications of the Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy 2020 Implementation Plan and the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (once released) with the intention of submitting a proposal to the 2024-34 LTP.

Decision Making Process

34. 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 Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the “Biodiversity - Achieving Our Biodiversity Outcomes” staff report.

Authored by:

Russell Engelke

Team Leader Open Spaces

Dean Evans

Manager Catchments Delivery

Martina Groves

Manager Regional Assets

Dr Andy Hicks

Team Leader/Principal Scientist Water Quality and Ecology

Campbell Leckie

Manager Catchment Services

Anna Madarasz-Smith

Team Leader/Principal Scientist Marine & Coast

Mark Mitchell

Team Leader Principal Advisor Biosecurity Biodiversity

Dr Jeff Smith

Manager Science

Jolene Townshend

Senior Advisor Integrated Catchment Management

Approved by:

Chris Dolley

Group Manager Asset Management

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Integrated Catchment Management

Attachment/s

1 ⇩	Biodiversity Activities Across Council
2 ⇩	Biodiversity Team Internal and External Relationships

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

10 November 2021

Subject: Erosion Control - The Big Picture for Our RegioN

Reason for Report

1. This item provides the committee with an overview of cross-Council programmes of work that are contributing to the identification, control and monitoring of erosion across the Hawke’s Bay region.

Executive Summary

2. Erosion control activity is integrally linked to priority focus areas in the 2021-2025 Strategic Plan with a key strategic goal relating to erosion mitigation “By 2050, all highly erodible land is under tree cover”.

3. The significant challenges facing the region about the adverse impacts of erosive processes and corresponding sedimentation (estimated at an annual average of 5 million tonnes of soil loss across the region) alongside its response to climate change have been well traversed with Council.

4. Aside from regulatory processes such as Tukituki PC6, Council’s preferred erosion control response is non-regulatory as this enables relationship building and helps to ensure buy in from landowners.

5. As a result, Council has responded with a range of interlinked non-regulatory initiatives:

5.1. In the parts of the region where Farm Environmental Management Plans (FEMPs) are not regulated, and where landowners are being proactive in this space, FEMPs focus on good management practices to reduce environmental impacts on farms, including erosion mitigation.

5.2. Right Tree Right Place (RTRP), after four years of important background work, Council has recently funded the RTRP project to pilot a partial farm afforestation model to address the significant problem with the most erodible land. It aims to provide evidence, education, tools and confidence for the farming and investment sector to stimulate planting on the marginal areas of pastoral farms.

5.3. The Erosion Control Scheme (ECS) enables targeted erosion control to be delivered on highly erodible land through tree planting and other erosion control works on those areas of land that are not suitable for commercial planting purposes.

5.4. Protection and Enhancement Programme (PEP) focusses on particular catchments or at identified high value sites to implement environmental good management practices on the ground.

5.5. Environmental Monitoring consists of an automated sediment monitoring system to understand how the councils ECS is influencing erosion rates and sediment loads across the region.

6. The degree to which these initiatives are interlinked has evolved over time through good science and learning. The Catchment Delivery Team provides a pivotal relationship building function within Council for the extensive farm sector initiatives underway across Council. Examples of erosion control interlinked initiatives include:

6.1. Farm Environmental Management Plans (FEMPs) enable a strategic and planned approach to addressing the erosion issues on farms; understanding the full extent of the required work/initiatives, and what resources (ECS, RTRP) would be needed over time to make it happen.

6.2. HBRC Environmental Monitoring programme will inform progress with the erosion control initiatives and be used as a basis to further build monitoring programmes for new initiatives such as RTRP outputs.

6.3. Erosion control activity enables Council to credibly partner with Government to leverage funding support for initiatives like the Hill Country Erosion Fund and RTRP.

Strategic Fit

7. Erosion control activities can be linked to three of the four priority focus areas in the 2020-2025 Strategic Plan. The core focus area for erosion is Climate-smart and sustainable land use but is also strongly linked to:

7.1. Water quality, safety, and climate-resilience security

7.2. Healthy, functioning and climate-resilient biodiversity.

8. The key strategic goal (outcome measure) relating to erosion mitigation is:

8.1. By 2050, all highly erodible land is under tree cover.

Background

9. Hawke’s Bay is prone to hill country erosion due to its soft rock geology and large-scale land use change over many decades. To quantify the extent of the erosion in the region the SedNetNZ model was used. SedNet modelling estimates that approximately 252,000 ha of land yields over 1000t/km2/yr. This equates to approximately 5 million tonnes of sediment per year entering our rivers and then into our estuaries. It is this area of land that has been used as the basis for prioritising areas for action through the council’s erosion control activities.

Discussion

10. The Hawke’s Bay region is extremely prone to erosion. The Council has invested in a great deal of resources in quantifying the scale of erosion in the region and the SedNetNZ model has been the main tool in doing this.

11. The SedNetNZ model is being used by HBRC to identify areas of erosion and quantify the amount of erosion and sediment loss in tonnes per year across the region. With the information supplied by this modelling we are able to plan where we will prioritise our erosion mitigation efforts and by how much our mitigation efforts will reduce erosion in the future. The majority of the 5 million tonnes of soil/sediment loss per year across the region is coming from the northern part of the region (approximately 5 million tonnes). Data supplied by science, plans and tools have been developed to support council address this issue.

12. Four of the key issues when addressing erosion across the region are:

12.1. Most of the erosion is on private land and permission is needed to access it.

12.2. Currently, implementing erosion control actions is mostly voluntary.

12.3. Climate change, weather extremes such as drought and the impact on erosion plantings.

12.4. Pest and weed control destroying new plantings (e.g. deer and goats).

13. There are two approaches available to council when highlighting and discussing erosion issues with rural landowners:

13.1. Regulatory approach (Tukituki PC6 – farm plans)

13.2. Non-regulatory approach (one on one with landowners and engagement through catchment groups).

14. The non-regulatory approach is the preferred option as this creates an enduring relationship with the landowner and helps to ensure ongoing buy in.

15. The significant challenges facing the region about the adverse impacts of erosive processes and corresponding sedimentation alongside its response to climate change have been well traversed with Council. Council has responded with a range of interlinked initiatives (listed below) that have evolved over time through good science and learning.

Farm Environmental Management Plans (regulatory approach)

16. Farm Environmental Management Plans (FEMPs) have been required in the Tukituki region since 2018 for all properties over 4 ha, that do not meet the low intensity criteria. FEMPs are required through the revised RMA 2020 (part 9A) and regionally under the Tukituki PC6. In the near future, FEMPs will become mandatory nationally under Fresh Water – Farm Plans (FW-FP) and Integrated Farm Planning (IFP).

17. In 2018 several pathways were provided and tested for farmers to prepare a FEMP. They could write the plan themselves, use an industry professional or attend a workshop to complete their plans. This got the process underway and enabled the initial completion of plans. To improve quality and consistency of Tukituki FEMPs, an approved provider must write the plan and submit summary information to Council. Tukituki FEMP providers give an outside view to farmers to help identify erosion and other issues on their land. In the nationally proposed FW-FPs, a certifier will have to sign off each plan as meeting the required standards (to be determined). FEMPs should address specific time-bound actions on property, focusing on good management practices and regulatory requirements to reduce environmental impacts from the farming operation.

18. FEMPs address erosion and erosion control by identifying and addressing Critical Source Areas (CSAs) for erosion, with appropriate targeted actions. CSAs are locations on a property where a source of pollution meets a transportation method. Runoff from CSAs carries sediment and other nutrients into waterways. In areas and catchments with erosion issues the FEMPs will identify and address these.

19. Catchment Advisors (C.A.) working in these target areas of high sediment loss will work with the farmer to develop an erosion control plan as a prerequisite for funding through the ECS. This is a plan which develops the detail of actions, costs and materials required on specified parts of the property over the next 2-5 years. Where a farm plan exists, the C.A. will be able to pick up the information in the plan to refine a more detailed agreement for action in the short term.

20. FEMPs have introduced a bottom-line requirement for everyone to be involved in identifying environmental risks on-farm and committing to actions in a time bound manner. Approximately 1000 properties in the Tukituki region meet either low intensity or FEMP requirements.

Figure 1: Coverage of FEMPs in 2018 submission cycle in the Tukituki

Right Tree, Right Place

21. In 2018, SedNet modelling identified 252,000ha of the region has land eroding at more than 1000 tonnes/km²/yr. After more than a decade of experience relating to forest planting and management, and exploring options about potential with carbon farming, Council embarked on a two-year project investigating foundational research about diverse tree cover as a principal tool to address this challenge. The project was jointly funded by HBRC and TUR/1BT.

22. Based on this work, a RTRP project has been planned to pilot a partial farm afforestation model to address the significant problem with the most erodible and least productive land. Fundamentally, it aims to provide evidence, education, tools and confidence for the farming and investment sector to stimulate planting on the marginal areas of pastoral farms.

23. The RTRP project builds on the experience within the Catchment Delivery Team, offering another solution for erosion control alongside the ECS and related activity. Further, the FEMP framework will increasingly become an input into prioritisation and planting regimes required on-farm, and the HBRC Environmental Monitoring programme will inform progress and be used as a basis to build a monitoring programme for RTRP outputs.

24. Through a partnership with The Nature Conservancy, due diligence will be completed on the opportunity to scale the RTRP model through a market driven impact investment framework.

25. Initial pilot farms have been identified to undergo a pilot farm selection process before having farm/forestry plans completed and potential funding partnership for tree planting.

Figure 2: Sediment Yield >1000t/km²/yr in Hawke’s Bay

26. There is expected to be around 10,000 ha of the highest risk land planted over the next ten years by grant funding initiatives directly supported by Council such as through Council’s investment of $30M in the Erosion Control Scheme. However, the scale of the regional context represents significant challenges, risks and opportunities, which the RTRP pilot is aimed to address.

27. After considering a Business Case and public consultation through the 2021-31 Long Term Plan process, Council agreed to fund $4.8M toward the pilot of the RTRP concept.

Erosion Control Scheme (ECS)

28. In 2018, Council established the Erosion Control Scheme. Its purpose is to enable tree planting and other erosion control work to occur on highly erodible land and enables this by providing significant financial support for these erosion control works.

29. The ECS enables targeted erosion control to be delivered on highly erodible land where other initiatives are not deemed appropriate e.g. RTRP, this work is agreed to in partnership with landowners. The ECS is a key tool for the Catchment Delivery Team to engage with and support landholders with land at high risk of erosion. The 2018 - 2028 LTP provided for $30 million over the 10-year term of the LTP to support this programme of work.

30. This scheme enables tree planting and other erosion control works to occur on those areas of land that are not suitable for commercial planting purposes. Examples of such land includes (but is not limited to) remote locations, infertile soil types, smaller erosion prone areas, and areas where commercial tree planting is inappropriate. Within such areas, the Erosion Control Scheme aims to:

30.1. Reduce soil erosion

30.2. Improve water quality through the reduction of sedimentation into waterways

30.3. Improve terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity through habitat protection and creation

31. The introduction of FEMPs in the Tukituki through PC6 had the potential to enable a strategic and planned approach to addressing the erosion issues on those farms; understanding the full extent of the required works, and what resources would be needed over time to make it happen. Unfortunately, because the actions within the FEMPs are held by the landowner and not the council, this information is not available unless each individual landowner provides it. Information that is gathered through the consenting process will be used for FEMP auditing purposes in the future.

32. Discussions with the Policy Implementation team have begun to ensure the non-regulatory approach of the ECS, and other Catchment Delivery work streams are aligned and integrated to the best extent possible, for the regional introduction of FEMPs in the future.

33. Catchment Delivery staff through their work with farmers, are some of the key relationship builders within Council, and these relationships help enable improved and more efficient access to these farms for council staff from other sections. These relationships are key to Catchment Delivery staff being able to identify opportunities, provide advice, and make key connections to the councils RTRP programme.

34. The Hill Country Erosion Fund (approx. $5m over 4 years) is central government funding (MPI) that was applied for and secured to financially support the implementation of the councils Erosion Control Scheme. Examples of targeted support include: the funding of 4 staff, providing a range of events to educate and train staff and external groups to help facilitate erosion control actions, and works on the ground, including the space planting of poplar and willow and assisted reversion. This fund has also provided for a monitoring programme using ISCO sediment monitors (see Fig:3). These monitors record the change in sediment load over time in catchments where erosion control has taken place.

Figure 3: Automated sediment sampler (ISCO)

Protection and Enhancement Programme (PEP)

35. Formally the ‘Hot Spots’ programme, the Protection and Enhancement Programme focusses on particular catchments or at identified high value sites to implement environmental good management practices on the ground. This programme works alongside and in collaboration with Catchment Delivery staff, local communities, and key stakeholders to achieve agreed outcomes. Because of the natural alignment with the ECS when working in areas of highly erodible land, outputs from this programme also have a key part to play in meeting councils LOS for erosion and ensuring regional coverage.

Environmental Monitoring

36. To monitor how the councils Erosion Control Scheme (ECS) is influencing erosion rates and sediment loads across Hawke’s Bay, an automated sediment monitoring system has been set up. This network (see Fig 4 attached) of 20 automated sediment samplers (called ISCOs) is programmed to only take samples at high flows. It is estimated that 90% of total sediment is transported during these high flows and is something we haven’t regularly monitored before. The ISCOs have been strategically located in areas that will have major tree planting carried out up stream allowing the ISCO to detect any reduction in sediment because of these plantings. This is a long-term monitoring programme with the effects of the ECS not expected to show a reduction in sediment for 10-20 years as the new plantings mature. However, the effects of other erosion mitigation measures such as riparian planting and/or increased riparian fencing / stock exclusion may show up much earlier in the monitoring.

37. Data is already being collected from the ISCO network and our oldest site at Red Bridge on the lower reaches of the Tukituki River (established in 2018) has already shown the large amounts of sediment that can be mobilised during a brief intense storm event. During a high flow event over a 3 day period in 2018 the ISCO sampling showed that nearly 400,000 tonnes of sediment moved past the Red Bridge site. As erosion mitigation measures are put in place including tree plantings through the ECS, we should see a decline in these loads over time.

Next Steps

38. Longer term we will need to consider what targeted erosion control programmes/tools follow once the ECS and RTRP have run their course and funding has ended.

39. To fully understand the impacts and opportunities of Farm Planning regulations on the ability to deliver effective and timely erosion control.

40. To fully understand and then plan for the future capacity and capability needs for council to deliver on their long-term strategic goals, and meeting annual levels of service measures for erosion control.

41. To ensure manageable leveraged external funding is sourced to support regional erosion control e.g. HCEF.

42. To ensure maximum value is added for landowners and the regions ratepayers when catchment delivery staff are on site providing advice and partnering with landowners.

Decision Making Process

43. 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 Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the “Erosion Control - The Big Picture for Our Region” staff report.

Authored by:

Michael Bassett-Foss

RTRP Project Manager

Dean Evans

Manager Catchments Delivery

Dr Barry Lynch

Team Leader/Principal Scientist (Land Science)

Marnie Mannering

FEMP Project Manager

Brendan Powell

Manager Catchments Policy Implementation

Dr Jeff Smith

Manager Science

Approved by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Integrated Catchment Management

Attachment/s

1 ⇩

Figure 4: Automated ISCO sampling locations across Hawke’s Bay

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

10 November 2021

Subject: Tukipo Wetland

Reason for Report

1. This item provides an update on the successful delivery of the 1.6ha constructed wetland in Tukipo following Hawke’s Bay Regional Council committing $100,000 of the Recovery Fund to this project in the 2020-21 financial year.

Background

2. Ambitious nitrogen targets have been set in the Tukituki Plan, and in some cases require instream Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen (DIN) levels to be more than halved.

3. Fonterra included the Tukipo catchment to be part of their Sustainable Catchments programme, due in large part to proactive work from the Tukipo Catchment Care Group (TCCG). The Tukipo sub-catchment was sitting at 2.32 mg/l, which is almost 3 times over the 0.8 mg/l DIN target and indicated a 66% reduction in instream DIN levels would be required.

4. Ongoing research has proven the effectiveness of constructed wetlands at removing nitrogen from waterways via biological conversion (microbial denitrification) rather than plant uptake. This confirms that a strategic network of constructed wetlands, in combination with on farm improvements around nutrient management, may help achieve the ambitious nitrogen reduction targets.

5. The Council Tukituki implementation team believe that constructed wetlands may form a key part of the strategic Tukituki response, and are very supportive of the constructed wetland initiative. It is hoped that the outcomes from this project will provide a model that is transferable to other properties in Hawke’s Bay. A well-designed constructed wetland that is sized to 1% of the catchment area can remove 20-30% of the nitrogen passing through it.

6. Fonterra provided HBRC and the TCCG funding to undertake a scoping exercise to identify willing landowners who had suitable sites to build a constructed wetland to achieve DIN reduction on a catchment scale ($30k). A further $226k was then provided to design and construct a wetland on the most promising site.

7. Over this same time period, NIWA obtained funding from MPI’s Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change: Freshwater Mitigation Fund to comprehensively monitor 6 constructed wetlands to collect high quality data to refine our understanding on wetland performance and help improve the wetland modules available in Overseer or for use in other nutrient modelling approaches. The two projects aligned and so NIWA designed the Tukipo wetland so that it could be used in their national project.

8. Following completion of the scoping exercise a preferred location was selected that had full support from the landowner to construct a 1.6ha wetland to capture and treat water from a 180ha catchment. The wetland was designed larger than originally expected in order to meet requirements for inclusion in the national NIWA study.

9. To fit in with project timelines and due to COVID-19 lockdown in 2020 preventing site visits, the wetland design work had to be completed remotely and was based off LiDAR (remote sensing using pulse lasers to measure elevation) which gave the most accurate data set available at the time.

10. Prior to construction beginning the design was double checked with a surveyor building a 3D model for machinery to run off. However, this process revealed that the LiDAR data underestimated the volume of earth that needed to be moved. This resulted in the construction costs increasing to exceed the available budget.

11. A decision was made to proceed with the construction to meet project timeframes. This meant the wetland earthworks would be completed within available budget, but the site could not have been planted with the correct wetland plants needed to ensure a highly functioning constructed wetland in time to be part of the NIWA monitoring project, unless additional funding as obtained.

12. To fill the budget gap, a paper was successfully presented to the Corporate and Strategic Committee on 3 March 2021 seeking $100k to be committed from Councils $1m Recovery Fund to allow for the complete delivery of this project to ensure the wetland could be created within the timeframes needed for inclusion into the NIWA national monitoring programme.

13. Prior to this decision the constructed wetland project had been exclusively funded by Fonterra (approx. $250k), with Council only committing a small amount of staff time. Councils’ investment provided an opportunity to further collaborate with national organisations to lead and deliver an exciting research and development project. The results of which could provide a model that would add significant value to how we target nitrogen reduction throughout the region and provide a more holistic understanding of the water quality benefits derived from wetlands. It would also provide a local farm feature for the Tukituki community to consider.

Discussion

14. Construction of the wetland was completed in May 2021 which included the planting of approximately 24,000 native wetland plants. Further details on the development of the wetland will be presented during the Environment and Integrated Catchment Committee meeting.

15. A successful planting day was held involving Tukipo Catchment Care Group and a range of HBRC from Regulation, Consents/Compliance and Catchment Delivery.

16. HBRC Comms Team prepared a media release covering the successful delivery of the project that highlighted the collaborative approach between key organisations and landowners to investigate possible solutions to current water quality issues. This was covered by multiple radio and print media as well as TVNZ One News and included staff/landowner interviews. The landowner has welcomed multiple calls from other interested farmers based on his interview.

17. NIWA are committing their expertise and the equipment required to continuously monitor flow, nitrate, turbidity and floods, alongside covering the laboratory costs for monthly monitoring at the wetland inflow and outflow for three years with monitoring set to begin late summer. The expectation is that a well-designed wetland that is sized to 1% of the catchment area can remove 20-30% of the nitrogen passing through it.

18. The collaborative approach taken to deliver this project has helped build and strengthen relationships with rural landowners in the region, creating positive solution focused discussions about how to improve water quality.

19. Hawke’s Bay region has a paucity of functioning wetlands and the establishment of this new wetland will also be of significant value to the region for biodiversity through increased habitat.

Next Steps

20. Regional Councils and NIWA are exploring how best to provide nitrogen credits to farmers who are using constructed wetlands to help meet their nitrogen reduction targets.

21. Fonterra are interested in committing further funding for projects targeting water quality improvement in the Tukituki catchment. We are currently in discussions around funding a scoping exercise for the entire Ruataniwha Plains, using Lidar and land use layers to identify optimum areas for locating catchment scale constructed wetlands for Nitrogen stripping. This approach will seek to identify the best locations for a strategic network of constructed wetlands of various sizes on both private and HBRC owned land.

Decision Making Process

22. 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 Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the “Tukipo Wetland” staff report.

Authored by:

Dr Andy Hicks

Team Leader/Principal Scientist Water Quality and Ecology

Thomas Petrie

Programme Manager Protection & Enhancement Projects

Approved by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Integrated Catchment Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

10 November 2021

Subject: Update on IRG Flood Control Resilience Funded Projects

Reason for Report

1. This report provides an update on the four projects approved for funding as part of the Crown’s Flood Control Resilience Funding with the Infrastructure Reference Group managed by Kānoa – Regional Economic Development & Investment Unit, formerly known as the Provincial Development Unit.

Background

2. Council has received IRG funding for a total amount of up to $19.2m (plus GST, if any) which is a 64% contribution to four projects.

3. Works commenced on all four projects in late November 2020.

Discussion

Project 1: Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme (HPFCS) Levels of Service - $20m

4. The HPFCS Levels of Service project will review and upgrade sites across the Tūtaekurī, Ngaruroro, Lower Tukituki and Clive rivers, to increase flood protection across the scheme to a 1 in 500-year event.

5. This project is programmed over a three-year with IRG funding but will carry on after this period and will build upon existing river modelling, condition assessment and property analysis undertaken as part of the Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme level of service review.

6. HBRC co-funding of $7.2 million is required to match IRG funds of $12.8 million.

7. Prioritisation of 39 stop bank sites is being established by Asset Management based on freeboard levels, risk of overtopping, consequence of failure and value of assets protected. Sites are being assessed in order of priority and at least 8 sites will be upgraded through the course of this project. Assessment and upgrade of remaining sites will continue beyond the 3-year programme.

8. Physical works at Taradale stop bank are due to commence early November. Early contractor involvement has allowed planning and methodology of these works to be fast tracked in order to meet the summer 2021/22 construction window. Cycle trail detours have been implemented and enabling works, including tree removal, cycle trail upgrades and specimen tree relocation have been completed. Targeted completion for stop bank strengthening May 2022.

9. Investigations are complete for Ngatarawa and Roy’s Hill, design optioneering is underway for both sites. East Clive and Moteo field investigations complete, analysis is underway and design optioneering due December 2021.

10. To date, works completed are:

Site Name & Location	River	Works Completed to Date	Proposed Works**
Taradale Stopbank Strengthening (XS 17 - 22 LHS)	Tūtaekurī	Archaeology assessment, geophysical testing, Geotechnical investigation, Topographical survey, Preliminary Design, detailed design	Increase height of stopbank for overtopping, increased width of stopbank,
Moteo Stopbank Strengthening (XS 43b - 47 RHS)	Tūtaekurī	Archaeology assessment, geophysical testing, Geotechnical investigation scoping, Topographical survey, field investigations	TBC pending output from geotechnical testing and ground model. Native planting programme
Omaranui (XS 23-41 RHS)	Tūtaekurī	Archaeology assessment, Topographical survey	Increase height of stopbank for overtopping
Haumoana Stopbank Strengthening (XS 1 - 4 RHS)	Lower Tukituki	Archaeology assessment, Geotechnical investigation scoping, Topographical survey	Increase height of stopbank for overtopping
East Clive Stopbank Strengthening (XS 1 - 4 LHS)	Lower Tukituki	Archaeology assessment, Geotechnical investigation scoping, Topographical survey, field investigations	Increase height of stopbank for overtopping
Pakowhai Park (XS 15-20 RHS)	Ngaruroro	Geophysical testing, Topographical survey	TBC pending output from geophysical testing
Raupare Lower (XS 20-27 RHS)	Ngaruroro	Geophysical testing, Topographical survey	TBC pending output from geophysical testing
Ngatarawa (XS 49 - 51 RHS)	Ngaruroro	Archaeology assessment, Geotechnical investigation underway, Topographical survey, field investigations	TBC pending output from geotechnical testing and ground model. Extensive native planting programme
Roy's Hill (XS 41 - 44 RHS)	Ngaruroro	Archaeology assessment, Geotechnical investigation underway, Topographical survey, field investigations	TBC pending output from geotechnical testing and ground model. Extensive native planting programme
Meeanee d/s motorway (XS 13-17 LHS)	Tūtaekurī	Topographical survey	TBC pending output from geotechnical testing
Haumoana Upstream of Blackbridge (XS 4 - 10 RHS)	Lower Tukituki	Archaeology assessment, Topographical survey	Increase height of stopbank for overtopping
Farndon Road Erosion	Clive	Works scoped for Engineering Panel	Scour protection to Farndon Road

** Subject to outputs from site investigations, geotechnical modelling and any additional hydraulic modelling

11. Request for Tender will be sought for significant native planting programme to support environmental outcomes at Moteo, Ngatarawa, Roy’s Hill and East Clive berms. This package of works shall increase biodiversity through support from community engagement and align with proposed Public Use of Rivers (PUR) projects.

12. HBRC have committed to deliver eight stop bank strengthening projects over the three-year period through IRG funded works. Further, by undertaking integrity investigations of similar or higher priority sites in tandem, HBRC provides confidence in the resilience of our flood protection assets and thus achieve the objective of increasing climate resilience of HPFCS systematically. Should these investigations lead to physical work requirement, this will add to the following list.

Year	Committed Projects
1	Taradale Stop Bank (earthworks, stop bank upgrade, PUR)
2	Moteo Stop Bank (berm improvement – groynes or strategic planting; earthwork requirement being assessed as part of design)
2	East Clive (stop bank upgrade required following overtopping assessments; landfill on riverside presented additional challenges)
2	Ngatarawa – Berm improvements (Native planting programme)
2	Roys Hill – Berm improvements (Native planting programme)
2/3	Clive River @ Farndon Road (erosion protection - potentially sheet piling)
2/3	Omarunui (stop bank upgrade required & archaeological complications being worked through)
3	Haumoana (stop bank upgrade required & archaeological complications being worked through)
3	Pakowhai Park (earthworks, stop bank upgrade, PUR)
3	Haumoana upstream of Blackbridge (earthworks, stop bank upgrade)

13. FY 20-21 expenditure was $832k against a projection of $944k.

14. The estimated value of FY 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 planned works is $10.68 million, $4.62 million and $3.9 million respectively. In 2021-22 this includes stop bank strengthening construction works on two sites (Taradale and East Clive), detailed design of five sites (based on results from geotechnical investigations), commencement of investigative work on further six sites.

15. FY 2022-23 planned works includes stop bank strengthening construction works on at least further four sites, detailed design of two sites (based on results from geotechnical investigations) and completion of environmental enhancement of 5 sites.

16. FY 2023-24 planned works includes stop bank strengthening construction works on at least further two sites and completion of environmental enhancement of 3 sites.

Project 2: Upper Tukituki Gravel Extraction Flood Control Scheme - $8 million

17. The Upper Tukituki (UTT) Gravel Extraction project will seek opportunities to subsidise transportation of gravel from this scheme with a focus on competitive tendering and supporting the local economy. Gravel extraction is required to maintain existing nameplate capacity of 1:100 level of protection within this scheme. As a consultation topic in the 2020 Long Term Plan, Council agreed to fund the HBRC co-contribution of $2.88m from the UTT scheme through a long term loan allowing the project to proceed.

18. As part of the procurement process, Registrations of Interest (ROI) were sought through GETS in order to pre-qualify gravel extraction contractors. A request for extension of time was received from the Chief Executive of the Aggregate and Quarry Association on behalf of their members, this was subsequently awarded delaying the deadline to 22^nd October. A total of 24 submissions were received through the ROI process.

19. A Request for Tender (RfT) has been drafted to invite pre-qualified tenderers to submit on Tranche 1 sites. It is anticipated IRG contracts for Tranche 1 shall be awarded early December 2021 with a total volume of 120,300m³ gravel available for extraction. Tranche 1 sites (reaches) shall be “auctioned” at $4/m³ in order to encourage local contractors to extract.

20. HBRC shall provide UTT ratepayers with a project update on 30 November 2021, this was due to take place in September but was postponed due to COVID restrictions.

21. To date, HBRC has completed:

21.1. Gravel material testing programme - results were made available to all tenderers as part of the ROI.

21.2. Prioritisation of key reaches – Determined on the following criteria: Freeboard (related to 100 year flood risk), Average annual flood risk (related to availability), Lateral erosion risk. This allows extraction to focus on areas which are critical to the flood protection of the UTT scheme.

21.3. Availability of gravel – based on prioritisation, data provided as part of ROI to tenderers and shall assist with programming. This data has also been shared with local contractors, upon request, following the last public meeting.

21.4. Identification of additional access – HBRC Schemes Team assisting with landowner discussions for critical access.

21.5. Request for Information from industry – 17 submissions received relating to cost for extraction and transportation. This data will underpin the project’s rationale for reasonable subsidised costs, specifically relating to transportation of material.

21.6. Public meetings with both ratepayers and contractors to provide updates on project status. Contractor representation at public meetings was attended by small and medium sized local businesses as well as larger businesses from out of the region. HBRC have also met on site with a small local contractor to better understand their business and how they might support any potential Chilean Needle Grass (CNG) studies.

21.7. Assessment of known archaeological assessment sites – Working with New Zealand Archaeological Association (NZAA) to map known sites on HBRC GIS with buffer zones based on site type.

21.8. Liaison with HBRC Biosecurity and AgResearch to scope a testing programme to manage CNG within the UTT scheme. Works are likely to benefit out with this programme and external funding is being considered to achieve successful outcomes.

21.9. Met with both Heretaunga Taiwhenua and NKII and discussed a full time HBRC “Kaitiaki” role for supervision of the works for the duration of the programme.

21.10. Met with Pam Kupa (CHBDC Pou Whātuia - Māori Relationships Manager) to further explore opportunities for Kaitiaki role

22. FY 2020-21 expenditure was $298,000 and FY 2021-22 costs are estimated at $2.99 million.

23. In FY 2022-23 costs for gravel extraction are estimated at $4.712 million.

Project 3: Upper Tukituki Flood Control Scheme SH50/Waipawa Erosion - $1 million

24. This one-year project provided engineered erosion protection works on the right and left bank of the Waipawa river, immediately upstream of SH50 bridge.

25. To complete the project, HBRC Works Group installed 75 precast concrete akmon units on the left bank of the Waipawa river, carried out earthworks to cut and fill gravel to form the new river channel, including excavation, carting and shaping approximately 70,000m³ of gravel, and installed 3,166 lineal metres of rail irons and 8,100 lineal metres of wire rope to form permeable groynes on the left and right banks.

26. An independent ecological impact assessment undertaken at the site concluded that the completed project has resulted in an overall net positive effect on biodiversity.

27. The planting of 4,700 pole trees in the berm area and a further 1,000 native trees was undertaken in partnership between Kaitiaki Rangers (Waiohiki Marae) and Works Group. Training and upskilling was provided to the Kaitiaki Rangers on this collaborative project which has received positive feedback from Kānoa due to HBRC fulfilling its social procurement outcomes to engage and upskill Māori/Pasifika businesses.

28. Project completion was completed at a total value of $1.25 million.

29. HBRC collaborated with stakeholders and community to prepare a short video highlighting the project, its challenges and successes. This has been endorsed by Kānoa and has received fantastic feedback through River Managers SIG. (Full length video to be played during EICC meeting)

30. A closedown report for this project shall be prepared for IRG next month. Following receipt of this, no further reporting shall be provided to Council for this project.

Project 4: Wairoa River, River Parade Erosion - $1 million

31. This one-year project programme will provide steel sheet piled erosion protection works on left bank of the Wairoa River.

32. Geotechnical investigations, design optioneering and preliminary design and detailed of the proposed sheet pile wall have been completed and the physical works contractor has procured the necessary steel sheet piles. Unfortunately, the COVID Delta outbreak has postponed the start date from mid-September to early November 2021.

33. The relocation of the Wairoa District Council watermain has been completed in collaboration with Wairoa District Council

34. The proposed steel sheet piled wall is 73 lineal metres with 12 metre screw anchors which are drilled below the existing River Parade Road.

35. The local civil engineering contracting company Lattey’s Civil and Precast have been appointed to as main contractor with Wairoa based QRS providing sub-contracting services relating to civil works.

36. Planting of the upstream riverbank with the appropriate trees and bush will provide stability to the rivers edge whilst also contributing to the biodiversity of the river. This will allow safe access for the public to the river’s edge and popular whitebating (Inanga) area.

37. HBRC have been engaging with local groups Tātau Tātau o Te Wairoa Trust, Wairoa Reserves Board – Matangirau (WRB) and Wairoa District Council to identify the aspirations and requirements of this project on the cultural values to the region. HBRC are in the process of undertaking a cultural impact assessment of the local Iwi groups, as well as an assessment of environmental impacts on the fish, birds and plants of the river and surrounding area.

38. FY 2020-21 expenditure was $98k, and FY 2021-22 costs are estimated at $902k.

Decision Making Process

39. 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 Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the “Update on IRG Flood Control Resilience Funded Projects”.

Authored by: Approved by:

David Keracher

Manager Regional Projects

Chris Dolley

Group Manager Asset Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

10 November 2021

Subject: Chilean Needle Grass Control Programme Review Update

Reason for Report

1. This item updates the Committee on the review of Council’s Chilean Needle Grass (CNG) programme. This more detailed review of the programme was initiated by a Local Government Act 2002 S17a effectiveness and efficiency review which was presented to Council in September 2020.

Executive Summary

2. The recommendations from the S17a review presented to Council in September 2020 outlined that Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) should be spending more on biosecurity. How much more and on which programmes required a business case analysis through the Long Term Plan (LTP) and/or Annual Plan process to examine staffing and budget needs based on the finding in the report.

3. As part of the S17a review process a number of biosecurity programmes will be going through a more detailed assessment of their funding and delivery. The Possum Control Area (PCA) programme was the first of these programmes and is now in a partial plan review process. Council’s Chilean Needle Grass (CNG) programme is also undergoing a more detailed review.

4. A number of issues from the S17a review raised about the CNG programme have had solutions put in place to improve programme effectiveness and efficiency. These include resourcing for infield delivery and IT/data management. Some of these such as resourcing are interim solutions to provide time to support longer term decision making.

Background/Discussion

5. In September 2020 a S17a effectiveness and efficiency review was carried out of biosecurity programmes. This review meets the requirements of S17a of the Local Government Act 2002 that requires, that a local authority must review the cost-effectiveness of current arrangements for meeting the needs of communities within its district or region for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions.

6. An independent reviewer Kevin Collins from the Waikato was engaged by the Group Manager ICM. Kevin has a Master of Environmental Science and Policy degree from John Hopkins University in the United States. Prior to his consulting career, Kevin managed biosecurity and biodiversity programmes for Waikato Regional Council. His skills and experience have been shaped by more than 30 years of practical experience.

7. Kevin has also undertaken the more detail review of Council’s CNG programme. His report on the programme is attached and Kevin will present to Councilors on the key context and findings of that report.

8. While the Biosecurity Act gives councils wide ranging powers to carry out pest management activities, it does not require any particular level of pest control or that any pest control occur at all. The Act stipulates what must be included in a regional pest management plan if a council chooses to have one, but it does not stipulate outcomes or performance levels.

9. In line with the point noted above, acceptable levels of “efficiency and effectiveness” in pest management are left to the discretion of councils. Councils themselves decide what constitutes “efficient and effective” pest management in the context of their region and their community expectations. In practice, this means that the approach taken by councils often differs widely.

S17a Review findings on the Chilean Needle Grass programme

10 More staff are needed, at least during the busy summer season, if the Chilean needle grass programme is to have a greater chance of delivering

10.1 Staff response - An internal reprioritization of resources from staff on parental leave or from the predator free Hawkes Bay programme has taken place. This has seen an additional 2.5 FTEs made available to the pest plants team from October 2021 to June 2022 (the key pest plants control season).

11 A more complete business case analysis is needed to examine whether the programme could be delivered more effectively in other ways, including different control methods and the use of contractors rather than landowner responsibility. Land use change options should also be actively considered.

11.1 Staff response - The more detailed report presented to the committee today provides the foundation for a more complete business case analysis. This work will take some time to develop and will be brought back to council in the 2022-2023 financial year with a view that resourcing any changes could be made as part of the 2024 LTP.

12 The Chilean needle grass surveillance programme should be reviewed to determine if it can confidently determine the current level of infestation and reliably detect spread

12.1 Staff response - The detailed report discusses the CNG programme objectives and provides initial guidance. More detailed work will take some time to develop and will take some more time to develop and will be brought back to council in the 2022-2023 financial year with a view that resourcing any changes could be made as part of the 2024 LTP.

Decision Making Process

13 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.

Recommendations

That the Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the “Chilean Needle Grass Control Programme Review Update” staff report.

Authored by:

Campbell Leckie

Manager Catchment Services

Approved by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Integrated Catchment Management

Attachment/s

1 ⇩	Chilean Needle Grass Control Programme Review Report
2 ⇩	Chilean Needle Grass Presentation for EICC

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Environment and Integrated Catchments Committee

10 November 2021

Subject: Social Ecology Technical Report from Edgar Burns, Waikato University Professorial Chair

Reason for Report

1. This item updates the Committee on the work of the Associate Professor in Integrated Catchment Management (AP-ICM) that the Regional Council is partially funding.

Executive Summary

2. Council has partnered with the University of Waikato (UoW) to create an Associate Professor in Integrated Catchment Management.

3. Dr Edgar Burns was appointed to the role in 2019. Dr Burns has spent the past 18 months gathering information and intelligence relating to a variety of environmental sociology issues relevant to Council’s interests.

4. Dr Burns has a series of technical papers he is preparing and will be bring these at regular intervals to Council.

5. Dr Burns will present his initial technical paper on communication as it relates to our work.

Strategic Fit

6. This work touches on all aspects of our Strategic Plan and directly connects to our purpose statement that states we work with our community.

Background & Discussion

7. Council entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the UoW in 2018 that supported the creation of the AP-ICM.

8. Through the MoU and Councils LTP, funding has been committed until at least 2023 and this has allowed us to embark on a new direction and are investing significantly in changing outcomes in catchments within its region. There is an acknowledgement that this will require new ways of working and a greater connection of catchment communities to their land and freshwater. Council is, for the first time, investing in environmental sociology.

9. The creation of the AP-ICM role is a step in the journey of that investment and signals an understanding that managing environmental issues is more than a biophysical challenge, it is a social challenge also.

10. Investing in understanding the social processes that are operating as they relate to our work acknowledges that Council is typically not ‘managing the environment’ but working to understand and then manage the impacts of human activities on our environment.

11. Council staff are not typically trained in environmental sociology practice or theory and so a partnership with a university has proven to be a cost effective way to access the academic knowledge. The role of the AP-ICM is to translate that academic knowledge into practical ways of working for our staff. It is recognised that this will take some time to ‘trickle down’ and be operationalised.

12. As part of the process of capturing and transferring knowledge the AP-ICM will be producing a series of technical papers that will be disseminated to staff as they are produced. The attached paper is the first in this series and will be presented by Dr Burns.

Decision Making Process

13. 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 Integrated Catchments Committee receives and notes the “What Forms of Communication Work for HBRC, Technical Report from Dr Edgar Burns, Waikato University Associate Professorial Chair”.

Authored and Approved by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager Integrated Catchment Management

Attachment/s

What Forms of Communication Work for HBRC? Technical Report

Under Separate Cover

1 ⇩	HB Future Farming Trust Annual Report 2020-21
2 ⇩	HB Future Farming Trust Financials 2021

Topic	Raised by

Topic	Raised by