Agenda of Maori Committee - 26 February 2013

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 26 February 2013

SUBJECT: Naming of Clive River

Reason for Report

1. A number of tangata whenua have from time to time questioned the naming of the old Ngaruroro ‘channel’ as the Clive River.

2. The correct name, or in this case loss of a name, is a particular concern for tangata whenua as the name is the link to the history and whanau/hapu/iwi association with that taonga.

3. This report presents a compact outline of the history behind how this came about.

4. In the main the ‘history’ is taken from Council documents and minutes and may not present the ‘total’ picture in terms of Maori involvement.

Background

5. In 1951 the Catchment Board was not officially responsible for drainage control. Local Councils had that control. A meeting was called by the Catchment Board with all Councils in the area to discuss a comprehensive Heretaunga Plains flood control scheme.

6. In 1954 a number of options were presented to the local authorities.

7. Between 1954 and 1959 after much discussion and debate, a model had been developed and a final option decided on.

8. The then Minister of Works approved the chosen scheme in May 1961.

9. Between 1961 and July 1966 a number of streams were stopbanked, new bridges completed and the diversion channel cut.

10. In 1962 the Cartographic branch of the Lands and Survey Department sought a ruling from the NZ Geographic Board for names for the old channel. ‘Whakatu’ and ‘Clive’ were promoted along with 12 other options.

11. The NZ Geographic Board at that time appears to have gone with the name ‘Whakatu’.

12. It was 1968 before a sufficient flood enabled flood waters to scour the new diversion channel.

13. The old channel was finally blocked off in 1969.

14. The ‘old channel’ was then the primary and improved outlet for the Raupare and Karamu streams and their tributaries.

15. In October 1974 at a meeting of the NZ Geographic Board despite the earlier 1962 meeting and view, ‘Clive’ was adopted as the official name.

16. In 1975 the Geographic Board formally adopted the name “Clive River’ for the old course of the Ngaruroro. (NZ Gazette 1975(62) Page 1632).

For Consideration

17. Should the Committee wish to pursue the renaming, the Council should be kept informed. In addition, the Maori Committee may choose to seek Council’s support of the ‘case’ for the renaming of the river once fully developed and agreed by the Committee.

Recommendation

1. That the Maori Committee receives the report on the ‘Naming of the Clive River’.

Viv Moule

Human Resources Manager

Liz Lambert

General Manager (Operations)

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 26 February 2013

SUBJECT: Biodiversity Strategy Update

Reason for Report

1. This report updates the Committee on progress with the development of the Hawke’s Bay regional biodiversity strategy.

Background

2. The 2012-22 Long Term Plan (LTP) outlines Council’s intent to prepare a regional biodiversity strategy which will include a wide range of stakeholders in its preparation and the ultimate commitment to a regional strategy.

3. The specific LTP outputs are as follows:

3.1. 2012-13 finalise scope of strategy and begin preparation of draft strategy

3.2. 2013-14 Consult on the draft strategy and prepare the final biodiversity strategy

3.3. 2014-15 prepare the programme for work relevant to HBRC for inclusion in the next long term plan

4. Staff have been active in the early development of the strategy development process and have convened the first meeting of the Biodiversity Strategy Steering Group (BSG).

Progress to Date

5. Towards the end of 2012 there were a range of activities undertaken by the core working group (CWG) in preparation for the first BSG meeting. These included:

5.1. A Landcare Research biodiversity outcomes based workshop to set some initial context on higher level strategy outcomes for discussion at the BSG.

5.2. An initial analysis of where the key areas for alignment may be with other national or regional biodiversity related initiatives

5.3. Collating draft stakeholder GIS data relevant to regional biodiversity current state to present an initial snapshot at the first BSG meeting.

5.4. Preparation of a draft CWG and BSG terms of reference for discussion at the first BSG meeting

5.5. Initial broad areas for early BSG advice including the scope of the strategy, and the role (if any) of a biodiversity accord and regional biodiversity forum in more integrated regional biodiversity management.

5.6. Identifying the potential BSG participants.

6. The first meeting of the BSG was held on 5 February 2013. Councillors McGregor, Remmerswaal and Kirton are Council representatives on the BSG.

7. The BSG agreed to have Campbell Leckie facilitate their meetings. Campbell did a great job with the first meeting.

8. The BSG endorsed the attached terms of reference with some amendments (including the need to change the high level objectives noted below) and asked that the strategy scope be expanded to include some reference to the likely impact of climate change.

9. The BSG provided input to the high level strategy objectives and are to hold an additional meeting in April to refine these to allow the CWG to continue with the strategy development for further discussion.

10. A 2-page summary of the strategy development process is being developed to allow the parent organisations of the BSG participants to more clearly understand the significant and intent of the strategy development.

Decision Making Process

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

Recommendation

1. That the Maori Committee receives the report.

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management

Attachment/s

1 View

Hawke's Bay Biodiversity Strategy Terms of Reference (TORs) draft

Hawke's Bay Biodiversity Strategy Terms of Reference (TORs) draft

Attachment 1

Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy | Steering Group
Terms of Reference

1. Purpose

The purpose of this document is to describe the Context, Role and Operating Procedures for the Biodiversity Strategy Steering Group (BSSG) that is being convened to develop a regional biodiversity strategy for Hawke’s Bay by December ~~2013~~2014.

2. Study Area

The Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy or HBBS is a non-statutory undertaking with a study area confined to Hawke’s Bay Regional Council’s physical and biological legal boundaries. However, the group’s activities may extend outside HBRC boundaries to achieve regional outcomes and objectives.

3. Introduction

One action from the adopted Hawke’s Bay Land and Water Management Strategy is to develop a ‘Regional Biodiversity Strategy’ with relevant agencies such as the Department of Conservation, Fish and Game NZ, QEII Conservation Trust, Nga Whenua Rahui and territorial authorities. These agencies and stakeholders recognise the value of stronger alignment of individual activities and a clearer common purpose in responding to biodiversity challenges in the region. There are a range of initiatives that can be and are being undertaken by these organisations and others which contribute to the maintenance and enhancement of indigenous biodiversity. As such, the HBBS will be led by a Steering Group comprising members of these groups.

There is increasing recognition that well-connected natural ecological systems of sufficient scale are needed to support sustainable and diverse species within the Hawke’s Bay landscape. People living in the region want to ensure our natural landscape values are protected for generations to come.

The broad agreement and the collaboration of all stakeholders through a shared biodiversity strategy is vital. This will help to achieve the necessary changes in land and water management required for sustainable indigenous ecosystems in the region.

A jointly developed Regional Biodiversity Strategy will set:

· long term goals to achieve effective habitat protection to enable successful and diverse ecological systems;

· a region wide approach to biodiversity, with strategies to achieve those goals;

· priority areas for action and/or any funding commitment required; and

· the respective contributions of all stakeholders toward achieving those goals.

To that end, HBRC is facilitating a collaborative multi-agency approach to engage the wider community in developing a cohesive biodiversity strategy.

Understanding the region’s current level of biodiversity will involve the identification and mapping of areas of significant indigenous biodiversity. An agreed baseline inventory for biodiversity components will be established in 2012-13, and as part of the State of the Environment monitoring programme data will be collected to update ~~the~~ a regional biodiversity information database, which would also be contributed to by other organisations.

The costs associated with the development of a biodiversity inventory and strategy are $87,500 in Year 2102/13 and $15,500 in Year 2013/14.

4. Strategy and Key Drivers

The Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy (HBBS) will provide a framework to stock take and guide activities protecting and managing biodiversity in Hawke’s Bay. It is envisaged that the parent agencies of the BSSG will support the strategy by signing an accord committing them to action to deliver the strategy objectives.

The vision is to improve the region’s biodiversity by the year 2035, or as a minimum to maintain current biodiversity levels.

This work will also set long term goals to achieve effective habitat protection, enable successful and diverse ecological systems, identify priority areas for action and the additional funding required.

A Core Working Group has been established to draft the technical elements of the strategy. This group consists of DOC, Fish and Game, QE II Trust, HB Forestry, Nga Whenua Rahui and HBRC staff.

HAWKE’S BAY BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY VISION & OUTCOMES (to be confirmed)

5. Project Timeframe

Council’s long term plan outlines the following specific outputs for the biodiversity strategy:

· 2012-13 finalise scope of strategy and begin preparation of draft strategy

· 2013-14 Consult on the draft strategy and prepare the final biodiversity strategy

· 2014-15 prepare the programme for work relevant to HBRC for inclusion in the next long term plan

6. Role of the Steering Group

The role of the BSSG will be:

· To provide governance to the Core Working Group in the development of the Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy;

· To report progress milestones back to HBRC Councillors;

· To clarify areas of uncertainty or disagreement;

· To assist with community engagement and communication; and

· To keep their individual BSSG member organisations aware of biodiversity strategy development progress and engaged in strengthening.

7. Membership

BSSG members have been selected to reflect the broad interests in biodiversity and to provide a cross-section of values, understanding and perspectives. It is expected that members will engage with their organisations and wider social networks to explain what is happening in the collaborative process and to get feedback from them on the matters under consideration.

If someone considers that an important sector, interest or perspective is not represented in the group, we will consider adding another member, taking into account the availability of potential members and the need to keep the group to a size that can work effectively together.

The members of BSSG group have, in the main, been nominated by their respective sector or group to be their mandated representative. Where members have not been given the mandate of their sector or group, they will participate as individuals and are expected to also convey ideas and perspectives from their wider networks. In meeting three, each member will declare whether they are mandated representatives or not. At the end of the process, each member will declare whether they can support the proposed agreement and promote it to their organisations and networks (see definition of consensus below). Members will also be asked, at that point, whether their organisations (where relevant) would formally endorse the consensus agreement.

The BSSG includes:

Organisation	Confirmed	Suggestion	Point of contact
NCC		Tony Billing	Rod
HDC		Rowan Little or Philip Mackay	Tim
WDC		Peter Freeman	Warwick
CHBDC		Helen O’Shaughnessy	Iain
Fish & Game	John Cheyne
Forest & Bird		Neil Eagles	John Cheyne
Federated Farmers	Bruce Wills		Warwick
Nga Whenua Rahui	Mike Mohi
Ngati Kahungunu II		TBC	Mike Mohi
Maori Trustee		TBC	Mike Mohi
DOC	Dave Carlton
DairyNZ		Anna Lambourne	Warwick
HortNZ/Fruitgrowers		TBC	Campbell
MPI		Gillian Mangan	Campbell
Te Taiao HB Environment Forum		Vaughan Cooper	John Cheyne
HB Forestry	Brett Gilmore
QEII Covenant Trust	Troy Duncan
HBRC Councillors	Neil Kirton Liz Remmerswaal Ewan McGregor		Iain
Farm Forestry Committee	Marie Taylor		Warwick
Winegrowers			Campbell
Animal Health Board	Frank Pavitt		Campbell
KEY – also a member of the HBBS Core Working Group

8. Protocols for Collaborative Deliberation

This process is not just another consultation exercise – it is a new way of decision-making. Rather than simply advocating for a particular point of view, participants will be expected to explore, consider and deliberate on solutions that accommodate diverse views and interests, and to refrain from tactics that are divisive.

The protocol includes:

· Members must be willing to participate cooperatively for the greater good of sustainable biodiversity in Hawke’s Bay.

· Members must commit to open, honest and collaborative deliberations. To this end, we will follow the Chatham House Rule. This means that participants are free to discuss aspects of the process with other parties (excluding the media, see next point) but shall not attribute speakers or their affiliations to discussed options or opinions. The list of participants will be made public though.

· Contributions made within the Group will be “without prejudice”. That is, nothing said within the Group may be used in a subsequent process except for any recommendations and agreements reached by the Group.

· Members agree to refrain from discussion and debate through the media or public websites etc. If newsletters or group emails are used to communicate with networks, members are expected to show restraint and respect for other views and avoid promoting discord within the group. Any public statement about discussions or decisions by the group must be agreed by the group and made through an agreed spokesperson. This also applies to researchers, council staff and others who attend the meetings in support of the HBBS.

9. Councillor and Council Staff Involvement

Three HBRC Councillors and an officer from each territorial authority have been appointed to the BSSG. While these Councillors and officers have particular statutory and non-statutory responsibilities outside this process, within the BSSG they have the same rights and responsibilities as all other members. In addition to bringing their particular knowledge and perspectives, these Councillors and officers will represent the interests of the wider Hawke’s Bay community.

The HBRC Councillors are also members of the Regional Planning Committee which comprises all Councillors (9) and representation of eight of the nine Treaty Claimant Groups in Hawke’s Bay. This Committee provides the co-governance structure to recognise mana whenua’s kaitiaki role in managing the natural resources of the Hawke’s Bay rohe. This Committee is tasked with making resource management policy recommendations to the Council.

These Councillors and officers accept their mandate to support any consensus decision reached by the BSSG but recognise that they cannot speak on behalf of the Treaty Claimant Group representatives of the Regional Planning Committee, or in the case of officers cannot commit their Councils to any consensus without a formal resolution from their elected members.

Regional Council staff including the Group Manager Resource Management (GM RM or a delegated authority) will facilitate the Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy. Other regional council support will be provided through the GM RM including financial advice, media assistance, engineering, technical, planning and regulatory advice.

10. Role of Facilitator

Meetings of the BSSG will be led by an independent facilitator, who will:

· Ensure a fair and equitable group process

· Foster an atmosphere of respect, open-mindedness and group learning

· Design an enjoyable and productive process to enable the group to achieve its task

· Facilitate input from all members of the group, so that every voice is heard

· Provide guidance on collaborative deliberation techniques, including constructive ways to voice disagreements and negotiate potential conflicts.

11. Draft Meeting Schedule for BSSG

HBRC has committed to delivering a draft Biodiversity Strategy by December 2013. However, the timeframe will require flexibility to ensure that all relevant information has been considered for the development of a robust and enduring strategy. The function of the BSSG will be reviewed in December 2013.

Following is the schedule for meetings of the BSSG. It is intended that the meetings will follow this schedule but it may be necessary to vary as needs arise.

· Meeting 1: 5 February 2013

· Meeting 2: June 2013

· Meeting 3: September 2013

· Meeting 4: January 2014

· Meeting 5: May 2014

· Meeting 6: August 2014 (final meeting)

Contact:

Campbell Leckie, Land Services Manager, HBRC ph: 833 8099 0272147436 email: campbell@hbrc.govt.nz

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 26 February 2013

SUBJECT: Science Reports

Reason for Report

1. This report and the associated summaries will update the Committee regarding the status of two coastal environments and the outcomes of targeted investigation of a persistent recreational water quality issue, and the outcome of a follow-up survey of sediment contaminants in the Napier Inner Harbour.

Background

2. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) has responsibility under the RMA, the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement and the Regional Coastal Environment Plan to safeguard the integrity, form functioning and resilience of the coastal environment and to sustain its ecosystems.

3. HBRC fulfils this responsibility in part through operation of routine monitoring programmes. The monitoring programmes provide data regarding the quality of marine and fresh waters across the region, contaminants in sediments, as well as the ecological status of specific near shore environments, including reefs and soft-sediments (sandy beaches). Assessment of these data provides information regarding the state and trend of these resources and the ecological and human health risk posed by various contaminants.

4. The recreational water quality monitoring programme provides information regarding the human health risks associated with contact recreation. Historical monitoring identified that the quality of water near the mouth of the Puhokio Stream (Waimarama) persistently failed to meet recreational quality guidelines. The microbiological quality of water in this catchment was assessed in 2011/12 under three different flow conditions. Although the above average rainfall during this year made detection of specific contaminant sources impossible, the data indicated that faecal bacteria were generally of non-bovine ruminant origin. This result was consistent with the widespread contamination, suggesting that runoff from extensive sheep grazing was the source of the faecal indicator organisms. The investigation also demonstrated the value of molecular techniques, such as polymerase chain reaction DNA analysis for microbial source tracking purposes.

5. Historical monitoring identified that sediments in Napier Inner Harbour were contaminated with materials derived from stormwater and ship maintenance activities. A 2011/12 survey of sediment contaminants indicated that although contaminant concentrations had decreased in some areas of the port, concentrations of selected contaminants continued to exceed guideline threshold values. Periodic surveillance monitoring and intervention by HBRC compliance team is recommended.

6. Routine monitoring of sandy-beach ecosystems at Opoutama and Pourerere indicated that the population composition and species observed at these two beaches did not indicate human-induced impacts. The results also confirmed that detection and discrimination of human-impacts from variability induced by natural conditions was difficult, requiring monitoring over a sufficiently long period, coupled with well-designed and consistent monitoring techniques.

7. Similar conclusions were reached following routine monitoring of marine fauna resident on inter-tidal reefs at Kairakau, Hardinge Road and Te Mahia. The data derived from the second year of monitoring did not allow differences in community composition or species numbers arising from human activities to be distinguished from those caused by seasonal, annual or spatial differences across the reefs.

8. Effective resource management depends heavily on the quality of data and information available to quantify the state of the resources, identify trend and generally demonstrate that policy and regulation is achieving the desired effects.

9. The results from the four reports summarised in the attachments demonstrate the value of having high quality baseline data. In the case of Pukokio Stream, routine monitoring identified and confirmed a persistent water quality problem. Surveys of sediment contamination in the Napier Inner Harbour confirmed ongoing discharge of contaminants from stormwater and commercial activities. Faunal composition and species data obtained from surveys of representative rocky reefs and sandy beach environments provide baseline data which will allow meaningful future assessment of the state and trend in the quality of these habitats.

10. Provision has been made for future monitoring of these environments using robust and scientifically defensible techniques in the long-term plan (rocky reefs, sandy beaches and sediment quality - project 331). Not all reef and sandy beach sites are monitored each year – they are subject to an intermittent monitoring programme which will provide adequate data provided the monitoring effort is sustained. Recreational water quality is funded through project 315 (surface water quality).

Decision Making Process

Recommendation

1. That the Maori Committee receives the report.

Neale Hudson

Manager Environmental Science

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management

Attachment/s

1 View	Napier Inner Harbour
2 View	Environmental assessment of Intertidal reefs at Kairakau
3 View	Puhokio Stream
4 View	Soft Sediment Ecological Monitoring

Puhokio Stream

Attachment 3

Puhokio Stream Investigation: Bacteria source determination 2011/12.

EMT: 12/04. Plan No. 4339.

Bathing water is monitored for faecal bacterial contamination at 32 sites around Hawke’s Bay as a part of the annual Recreational Water Quality monitoring programme. The mouth of the Puhokio Stream at Waimarama beach has regularly exceeded the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and Ministry of Health (MoH) guidelines for concentrations of E. coli and enterococci and is graded as “very poor’ in terms of the MfE/MoH “Suitability for Recreation Grades” (SFRG).

A 2003 investigation of bacteriological water quality in the Puhokio Stream attributed the persistently poor water quality to the generally degraded nature of the catchment rather than any point source discharges. During 2011, Microbial Source Tracking (MST) tools were trialled by the Cawthron Institute during a survey of water quality in the Puhokio Stream. These molecular tools indicated that the faecal contamination was of ruminant but non-bovine origin. A subsequent sanitary survey of the stream identified a series of wool sheds sited close to the stream bank as potential sources of contamination.

The 2010/11 Recreational Water Quality report recommended that the Puhokio Stream catchment should be sampled more intensively (including upstream and downstream of the wool sheds), and that MST procedures (Polymerase Chain Reaction - PCR) be applied in the event of a large exceedance of guideline values.

During 2011/12, intensive sampling of the Puhokio Stream was undertaken during low, medium and high flow conditions.

The study found that:

§ E. coli concentrations were highest following heavy rainfall.

§ E. coli concentrations were generally proportional to the amount of antecedent rainfall – this is consistent with the mobilisation of particulate materials, which behave in a similar manner to microbial contaminants.

§ The flux (instantaneous load) of microbes is likely to be far higher following rainfall, which means that coastal receiving waters will receive large numbers of faecal indicator organisms during rainfall events.

§ High faecal concentrations in the Puhokio Stream could be caused by:

− diffuse source pollution from the entire catchment (which is characterised by intensive sheep farming), as well as

− potential point sources such as wool sheds.

§ In general, faecal contamination of the Puhokio Stream was lower in 2011/12 than previously observed and MST techniques were not applied.

These observations are based on a limited number of samples and should be repeated under various flow conditions if a more accurate estimate of the contributions of faecal contaminants from potential point sources and tributary streams is required.

The report recommends:

§ Continued sampling of Puhokio Stream as part of the annual Recreational Water Quality monitoring programme.

§ Use of MST techniques to investigate the sources of microbial contamination in the event of an exceedance of guideline values.

	Agenda Item	Action	Person Responsible	Due Date	Status Comment
1.	Ngati Hori Management Plan	Council staff to prepare paper for Council’s consideration	LL/VM		Management Plan to be presented at E&S Meeting on 20 February 2013
2.
3.

Item	Topic	Councillor / Staff
1.	Karewarewa Stream Issues	Iain Maxwell
2.
3.
4.
5.