Minutes of Biosecurity Working Party - Tuesday, 6 September 2022

1. Welcome/Karakia /Apologies/Notices

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and Cr Charles Lambert opened with a karakia.

BWP8/22 The apologies for absence from Peter Eden and Cr Craig Foss be accepted.

Simmons/van Beek

CARRIED

2. Conflict of Interest declarations

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

3. Confirmation of minutes of the Biosecurity Working Party held on 17 August 2022

BWP9/22

Resolution

Minutes of the Biosecurity Working Party meeting held on Wednesday, 17 August 2022, a copy having been circulated prior to the meeting, were taken as read and confirmed as amended to list J Simmons as a BWP member.

Simmons/van Beek

CARRIED

4.	Deliberations on changes to possum control in Hawke's Bay
	Mark Mitchell provided a brief overview of the processes carried out to date; discussion highlights included:
	· The process for decision making on possum control methods was set out. After this meeting staff will prepare the revised RPMP and a supporting report to present the Working Party’s findings and recommendations to the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council for approval. · Today the Working Party will consider all written and verbal submissions that have been made/heard, and will then make a determination on the control model/method that it believes is most appropriate. · Common themes and questions from the submissions received have been identified by staff. Where appropriate, an individual response has been made by staff to each submission - these have been included in the information provided to the Working Party for this meeting · Rating impact information that is now available is an important factor and one that some submitters were seeking more information on · In 2000, HBRC undertook a significant regionwide possum culling programme using contractors. Following this cull, responsibility for possum control returned to the land owner with HBRC undertaking monitoring activities. More than 700,000ha is now under the possum control scheme (PCA) · Monitoring activities may not have been sufficient and some landowners are not being conscientious; possum numbers are increasing. When monitoring identifies properties/ landowners that are not controlling possums adequately, most landowners agree to control being handed over to a contractor · OSPRI manage TB on affected properties. Once they have TB under control through culling possums on a property, they stop this control and it again becomes the property owner’s responsibility · There is strong support from the rural community for the proposal now being considered · No submissions have been received from the possum industry which is viewed as being a possum ‘farmer’ rather than a possum control mechanism · It is difficult to place a number/percentage on landowners that are doing an adequate possum control job - possibly 15-20% · It is estimated that contractors currently carry out between 15-20% of possum control, but that number/percentage is falling · Monitoring under the proposal will be carried out by HBRC using the proven Residual Trap Catch (RTC) method, which will be used to monitor contractor performance. This monitoring would be done annually in regions/areas that contractors are working in; currently individual property owners might be monitored once a decade · Large scale control is easier to monitor. Experience from other regions has been that following some initial resistance, after landowners witness large scale contractor control, trust is built and there is widespread acceptance. This may take two to three years · Forests, particularly newly established ones, are susceptible to possum predation. With renewed interest in forestry there is a need to quickly respond to rising possum numbers. Reaction to the proposal from forestry plantation owners has been a mixed; some are already using contractors and would prefer to be left to their own control regimes · Proposal is to introduce contractor control for the long term – eradicate then defend, rather than just undertaking control measures for a limited time to manage rising possum numbers · Every ratepayer would contribute at the same time, but areas may not be targeted for possum control for several years depending on infestation levels. This could lead to some landowners ceasing their current control activities, rather than paying twice for this through their own control efforts/costs and through HBRC rates · Proposal includes more staff to monitor contractor performance and biodiversity gains · Other pest control programmes (rabbits, stoats, goats, deer) could be altered/included in the PCA if a contractor model is in place. Biosecurity Act can be used to enforce/control pests that some landowners may not want to willingly control themselves · There is an existing targeted rate for possum control for rural landowners. Looking ahead, these owners would no longer need to undertake their own control (if they were), saving time and costs, nor would they need to employ a contractor themselves to do so · Urban ratepayers would be contributing at modest levels. Overall PCA would cost $3.4m p.a. for contractor control · Baits and poisons would no longer be subsidised by HBRC. Landowners could carry out some control methods (bait stations for instance) if they wanted to, including targeting other pests · When pest eradication is successful through widespread consistent controls, external funding sources may then be available to complete eradication or maintain control · The biodiversity benefits of the proposal are significant and need to be clearly set out in any recommendation to HBRC · Concern at the possible three to five year gap between the proposal coming into force and physical contractor control occurring in some areas · Looking across other regions - increasing compliance monitoring has not proven to be the most effective option to control pest numbers. It may initially be a less expensive option, but ultimately the contractor model is the most effective · If using a contractor, individual land owners are not able to gauge how well a contractor may be doing his job. HBRC will be actively auditing contractor performance thereby improving contractor performance overall · Working Party members support the proposed changes, particularly noting the expected biodiversity gains · Comments on particular submissions include: - Historically submissions approximately 80% in favour of proposals/changes presented and submissions received on this proposal were 76% in favour - Smaller properties (less than 30ha) can be difficult to manage through the existing PCA – the contractor only model will involve all properties - Land owners who are now controlling possums effectively will be encouraged to look at shifting their efforts to other pests - Larger forestry block owners who have their own contractors may be invited to be involved in the contractor selection process - In preparing the revised plan for HBRC consideration, staff will include details of the phasing in process including a potential hybrid model/process.
BWP10/22	Resolutions That the Biosecurity Working Party having received and considered submissions on the proposed changes to possum control, and having deliberated on these: 1. Receives and considers the Deliberations on Changes to possum control in Hawke's Bay staff report in conjunction with the written submissions received and provided to Council, as well as verbal submissions heard on 17 August 2022. 2. Agrees that the decisions to be made are significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue having conferred directly with the community and persons likely to have an interest in the decision over the period 1 July 2022 through 31 July 2022 and hearing verbal presentations made on 17 August 2022. 3. Agrees to recommend to Council that the consultation undertaken on the *Changing Possum Control in Hawke’s Bay* proposal is sufficient in terms of the factors in section 72 of the Biosecurity Act 1993. 4. Notes the next steps required will be: Recommend to the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council that it: 4.1 Approves the preparation of the plan, in accordance with section 73 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 (including a recommended management agency under section 100 of the Biosecurity Act 1993) 4.2 Should be satisfied of the matters required in section 74 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 4.3 Approves the plan presented including a report detailing the reasons for accepting or rejecting the submissions, in accordance with section 75 of the Biosecurity Act 1993. Foley/van Beek CARRIED

Closure:

Charles Lambert closed the meeting with a karakia.

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 12.30pm on 6 September 2022.

Signed as a true and correct record.

Date: ................................................ Chairman: ...............................................