Strategy and Policy Committee - Environment Southland and... · (Economics) Approved by: ... Strategy and Policy Committee – 30 ... Implications/Risks The research highlights the

2017 August 30 - Strategy and Policy Committee Agenda.docx Environment Southland is the brand name of Southland Regional Council

Committee Members Cr Grant Hubber (Chair) Cr Ross Cockburn Cr Rowly Currie Cr Robert Guyton Cr Lloyd McCallum

Cr Jeremy McPhail Cr Maurice Rodway Cr Eric Roy Cr David Stevens Chairman Nicol Horrell (ex officio)

Strategy and Policy Committee (Rautaki me Mahere)

1.00 pm 30 August 2017

A G E N D A (Rarangi Take)

1. Welcome (Haere mai) 2. Apologies (Nga Pa Pouri) 3. Public Forum, Petitions and Deputations (He Huinga tuku korero) 1.05 pm – Cr Paul Duffy, Southland District Council, will give Council an update on the

Curio Bay Project. 4. Notification of Extraordinary and Urgent Business (He Panui Autaia hei Totoia Pakihi) 4.1 Supplementary Reports 4.2 Other 5. Questions (Patai) 6. Chairman and Councillors’ Reports (Nga Purongo-a-Tumuaki me nga Kaunihera) 7. Director of Policy, Planning & Regulatory Services - 17/S&P/66

Item 1 - Modelling National Land Use Capacity ............................................................... 3

Item 2 - Invercargill to Bluff Walk and Cycle Trail Update .............................................11

Item 3 - Recent Resource Management Act Case Law ...................................................15

Item 4 - Recently Released Water-related Reports ........................................................21

Item 5 – Ongoing Matters 5.1 Policy and Planning Division Work Programme including External Agency Reports ....................................................................................................................27 5.2 Science Update ........................................................................................................27

8. Extraordinary and Urgent Business (Panui Autaia hei Totoia Pakihi) 9. Public Excluded Business (He hui Pakihi e hara mo te iwi)

V M Smith Director of Policy, Planning & Regulatory Services

RECOMMENDATIONS IN COUNCIL REPORTS ARE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS

COUNCIL POLICY UNTIL ADOPTED BY COUNCIL

Strategy and Policy Committee – 30 August 2017

2017 August 30 - Strategy and Policy Committee Agenda.docx

Page 3

Matters for Information/Noting (Kaupapa Whakamohiotanga/Tuhingia)

Item 1 Modelling National Land Use Capacity

MORF ID: A343323 Strategic Direction: Focus Area One: Land Water and

Coastal Management

Report by: Emma Moran, Senior Policy Analyst (Economics)

Approved by: Anita Dawe, Policy and Planning Manager

Executive Approval: Vin Smith, Director of Policy, Planning and Regulatory Services

Purpose To highlight key conclusions from a 2017 Ministry for the Environment report on national land use capacity, and their relevance for implementation of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management in Southland. Summary In May 2017 the Ministry for the Environment released a NIWA report entitled Modelling national land use capacity: Exploring bottom lines and headroom under the NPS-FM 2014 (Update Report). The question that the report seeks to answer is how the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) 2014 affects capacity or “headroom” for further land use development. The modelling undertaken by NIWA tested an interpretation of “maintain water quality” that is similar to a proposed amendment to the NPS-FM 2014 in the Clean Water package. The modelling showed that allowing movement within a water quality band “enabled a significant increase in headroom”. However, the application of this modelling to Southland requires further analysis and a more complete understanding of the complexity of the topic. Recommendation It is recommended that Council resolve to note the NIWA report entitled Modelling national land use capacity: Exploring bottom lines and headroom under the NPS-FM 2014 (Update Report). Report Background In 2011 the Government released the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2011 (NPS-FM). Following its release, concerns were raised that its direction, particularly in relation to the requirement to maintain or improve water quality, would potentially conflict with the Government’s Business Growth Agenda and its goal of doubling of exports by 2025. Despite these concerns, the NPS-FM was further developed in 2014 with the inclusion of the National Objectives Framework (NOF) into the NPS-FM. The NOF introduced water quality bands, and compulsory national objectives for protecting ecosystem health and human health (secondary contact), and “bottom-lines” (minimum acceptable states). In 2017 the Clean Water package proposed further amendments that includes a change to Policy CA(2(e)) of the NOF to state freshwater objectives to maintain water quality “are set



Page 4

at least within the same attribute state (i.e. level or band) as existing freshwater quality”. Although attribute state is defined as being a level, it appears to refer to the NOF bands. Alongside these developments, Environment Southland commissioned an Aqualinc report in 2014 entitled Assessment of Farm Mitigation Options and Land Use Change on Catchment Nutrient Contaminant Loads in the Southland Region. This report investigated how nutrient loads in Southland could be changed by on-farm mitigation measures, and the extent to which on-farm mitigation measures could off-set the effects of land use change and increase production on dairy farms on water quality. It concluded that while on-farm mitigation measures could reduce nutrient loads in Southland, they would be eroded over time through production increases on existing dairy farms, and new dairy conversions. A summary of the findings of the Aqualinc report is available in the factsheet shown at the end of this report. The full report is available on Environment Southland’s website: http://www.es.govt.nz/Document%20Library/Research%20and%20reports/Land%20and%20soil%20reports/regionalloadslandusemitigationreport_final.pdf Current situation In May 2017 the Ministry for the Environment released a NIWA report entitled Modelling national land use capacity: Exploring bottom lines and headroom under the NPS-FM 2014 (Update Report). The link to this report is as follows: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Fresh%20water/Landuse%20Capacity%20report%202016%20Final%2014%20October%202016.pdf The question that the report seeks to answer is how the NPS-FM 2014 affects capacity or “headroom” for further land use development. To answer this question, the report used the CLUES catchment load model to estimate land use capacity in two steps - first, the current situation (i.e. without mitigations) in relation to bottom lines; and second, the use of mitigations to address “shortfall” or create “headroom”. Shortfall was defined as the reduction in load necessary to reach a bottom line, and headroom as the increase in load that could occur before a bottom line is reached or water quality is not maintained. The modelling tested two interpretations of “maintain water quality”: 1. maintain current contaminant concentrations; and 2. maintain concentrations within an attribute band. The second interpretation is similar to the proposed amendment to Policy CA(2(e)) in the 2017 Clean Water package. Higher level objectives to improve water quality were not considered in the MfE NIWA report. The modelling took an “all monitoring nodes” approach and a “reduced monitoring nodes” approach, because “a single location below the bottom line can limit the headroom for the entire catchment upstream”. Within the modelling the water quality attributes considered for rivers were E.coli, as it relates to human health (primary and secondary contact), nitrate toxicity for ecosystem health (median and 95th percentile) and nitrogen and phosphorus for ecosystem health (with respect to periphyton). Attributes considered for lakes were total nitrogen and total phosphorus for ecosystem health (both with respect to phytoplankton). The analysis did not assess the accumulation of nitrogen, phosphorus or sediment loads, which is a significant challenge in Southland as many catchments ultimately end in estuaries or lakes.

http://www.es.govt.nz/Document%20Library/Research%20and%20reports/Land%20and%20soil%20reports/regionalloadslandusemitigationreport_final.pdf

http://www.es.govt.nz/Document%20Library/Research%20and%20reports/Land%20and%20soil%20reports/regionalloadslandusemitigationreport_final.pdf

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Fresh%20water/Landuse%20Capacity%20report%202016%20Final%2014%20October%202016.pdf

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Fresh%20water/Landuse%20Capacity%20report%202016%20Final%2014%20October%202016.pdf



Page 5

The NIWA report summarises its results using a series of maps and reached five main conclusions: 1. E.coli is the most restricting attribute at a national level and secondary contact bottom lines are

breached “only in small areas of Southland and Waikato”. Consequently, there is little shortfall and E.coli load reductions achieved through mitigation largely go towards creating headroom, although the headroom created from these mitigations is “fairly modest”;

2. nitrate toxicity bottom lines are breached “only in some isolated areas such as parts of South Canterbury and significant headroom for development can be created through mitigation (about 13.8% of current load at the highest mitigation level), while maintaining water quality”;

3. periphyton bottom lines are breached in a number of locations (for example, approximately 31.5% of the country lies upstream of locations that exceed nitrogen concentrations related to periphyton bottom lines). For nitrogen loads, periphyton and lake phytoplankton bottom lines provide more of a constraint than nitrate toxicity;

4. assessing concentrations at the reduced set of nodes had only a small influence on the amount of headroom and shortfall, partly because the analysis still included nodes for terminal reaches of streams that tended to constrain headroom in the catchment upstream;

5. allowing movement within a water quality band “enabled a significant increase in headroom” for E.coli (secondary contact) (15%), nitrate toxicity (25%), total nitrogen (6%) and total phosphorus (4.5%).

Whether the fifth conclusion applies in Southland is unclear. E.coli (primary contact) is already an issue at recreational bathing sites on the main stems of rivers across the region. Nitrogen levels to limit periphtyon (slime algae) are also a widespread issue (two to four times greater than the level used in the study), which has a considerable influence on ecosystem health. Figure 1 shows the estimated headroom and shortfall with respect to nitrogen for periphyton once all modelled mitigations are used (including off-paddock systems).



Page 6

Figure 1: Periphyton Nitrogen Mitigation Level 3 (Headroom and Shortfall)

The report identifies many simplifying assumptions and uncertainties in relation to the effectiveness of mitigations, the current use of mitigations, and the relationship between nutrient concentrations and periphyton abundance. The report, for these reasons, states that its maps should only be used as a general estimate of land use capacity. The report goes on to note the following aspects that were not considered:

multiple attributes simultaneously;

interactions between attributes;

point or urban sources of contaminants (this aspect is more important for regions with large urban areas);

the potential for mitigations beyond those modelled;

other NPS-FM attributes (e.g. ammonia toxicity, dissolved oxygen and cyanobacteria);

allowances for changes in concentrations as a result of long time lags; and

groundwater or estuarine constraints. All of these considerations are relevant to Environment Southland’s Science Strategy and the focus of future work programmes.



Page 7

Implications/Risks The research highlights the importance of understanding both water quality attributes (e.g. nitrate toxicity versus nitrate for periphyton) and the effectiveness of mitigations across the landscape. In assessing land use capacity, the report did not consider sensitive receiving environments (such as estuaries), increasing intensity from existing land uses, or the economic impacts of using mitigations to create headroom. It also did not consider that ecosystem health, in particular, is not fully represented by the current attributes in the NOF. Without taking all of the aspects noted here and in the report into account, it is likely that the report overestimates land use capacity and underestimates the ability to manage land use up to, but not over, a threshold between bands. The report is a snapshot in time and does not account for water quality trends. Although it is a starting point for analysis, to be useful, a more complete understanding of the complexity of the topic is required. There are potential implications for the NPS-FM Science Programme, especially in terms of filling gaps not covered in the analysis, and communication around land use capacity for limit-setting. Fit with strategic framework Focus Area Contributes Detracts Not applicable

Land, water and coastal management X

Air quality X

Biodiversity & biosecurity X

Risks and natural hazards X

Transport X

Maori and Governance X

Engagement and Partnership X

Science, technology and knowledge X

In isolation, the report’s simple approach tends to detract from land, water and coastal management and science knowledge for Southland. However, by noting the report and its relevance for Environment Southland’s Science Programme, the Council recognises it is a starting point for further research and highlights the complexity of the topic. Views of affected parties Not applicable. Compliance with Significance and Engagement Policy There are no issues within this report which trigger matters in this policy. Attachments The factsheet showing a summary of the findings of the Aqualinc report follows.



Page 8



Page 9



Page 10



Page 11

Item 2 Invercargill to Bluff Walk and Cycle Trail Update MORF ID: A346623 Strategic Direction: Focus Area Five - Transport

Report by: Russell Hawkes, Team Leader Policy and Planning


Executive Approval: Vin Smith, Director of Policy Planning and Regulatory Services

Purpose To update Council on the current status of planning for completion of the Invercargill to Bluff walk and cycle trail. Summary Construction of a walk and cycle trail between Invercargill and Bluff has been underway for the past five years, as funding allowed. Current planning is for completion of the trail to generally be adjacent to the state highway and/or railway line between Awarua and Bluff. Finalising the details to allow location of the trail and rail crossing points on KiwiRail land is taking somewhat longer than expected but things are now well advanced, with agreement anticipated within a couple of months. Agreement, in principle, has been obtained from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) to locate the trail adjacent to the state highway. Confirmation of these details is still dependent on reaching agreement with KiwiRail on crossing locations, but this only relates to the length of trail on state highway land. NZTA has funding available for work on/or adjacent to the highway to reduce the risks to walkers completing the Te Araroa trail. Discussions are currently underway to use these funds to construct sections of trail on state highway land that will reduce the identified risks but also contribute to completing the trail. None of these sections require agreement from KiwiRail. Recommendation It is recommended that Council resolve to note the report. Report Background The Invercargill to Bluff walk and cycle trail project was proposed to provide a walking and cycling facility connecting the existing Waihopai walkway with Bluff and to allow, where possible, increased access to the coastal marine area. A section of the trail was constructed by the Invercargill City Council, as part of the rehabilitation of the old landfill site adjacent to the New River Estuary. Initial planning took the trail round the side of the New River Estuary to the Mokomoko Inlet, alongside the inlet to Greenhills and then parallel to the state highway through to Bluff, a total distance of approximately 33 km. These plans have been revised with more of the new trail now being proposed to run alongside the state highway from Awarua to Bluff. Although the estuary route is significantly more desirable, the projected completion cost on this alignment of $2.3 million (2011 figures), excluding contingencies and legalisation costs, was considered at the time and following



Page 12

discussion with both local and national funding providers to be above the level of funding likely to be available. Funding for the 11 km of trail completed to date has come from Environment Southland, Invercargill City Council, Community Trust of Southland, Invercargill Licensing Trust, as well as a substantial contribution from Te Araroa Trails Trust that allowed completion of the 6.5 km section to Awarua. Current situation Planning and discussions with potentially affected parties have been ongoing during the last 15 months. The major parties involved are KiwiRail, NZTA and South Port who own a short section of land the trail will cross in Bluff. Agreement was reached early in the planning with South Port. NZTA gave its approval, in principle, but requires further details once the final rail crossing points are known. Completion of the trail generally on/or adjacent to the state highway or railway line is proposed. This will likely require a number of rail crossings, the location of which and design details have not been agreed with KiwiRail. During the last nine months various options have been discussed, without agreement being reached. In mid-July 2017, KiwiRail representatives visited Invercargill for a site visit and as a result agreement, in principle, has now been verbally reached with KiwiRail. The finer details, particularly in relation to rail crossing points, are still being worked on. Final agreement is expected within a couple of months. In the last two weeks we have been approached by NZTA representatives who have identified the number of Te Araoa trail walkers on the state highway between Awarua and Bluff as being a significant risk. It has funding available to carry out safety improvements adjacent to the highway to reduce this risk. We are currently in discussion with NZTA to investigate the use of these funds to construct a section of trail where the most significant risk exists on the proposed new trail location. These discussions have only commenced at the time of preparing this report and an update will be given at the meeting. The proposed location plan (shown at the end of this report) indicates the pinch points currently being discussed with NZTA. The final estimate for completion of the trail (currently $450,000) will need to be revised once KiwiRail crossing requirements are known. At this stage we will make application to other external funders to meet any shortfall in funding. The final construction estimate is likely to rise depending on the final agreement with KiwiRail, although any safety improvements constructed by NZTA on the state highway is likely to offset final trail construction costs. Implications/Risks There are no current risks to Council. Further work on the trail will only take place when a fully funded construction plan is in place. External funding providers will be approached once plans are finalised. Next steps Discussion will continue with NZTA and KiwiRail to allow final confirmation of plans. Once all approvals have been received a funding and construction plan will be developed.



Page 13

Fit with strategic framework Focus Area Contributes Detracts Not applicable

Land, water and coastal management X

Air quality X

Biodiversity & biosecurity X

Risks and natural hazards X

Transport X

Maori and Governance X

Engagement and Partnership X X

Science, technology and knowledge X

Views of affected parties Immediately affected parties are involved in current discussions and their approvals are required prior to further steps being taken. The project has been consulted on as part of Council’s long-term planning and no further public consultation is planned. Compliance with Significance and Engagement Policy There are no issues within this report which trigger matters in this policy. Considerations Financial implications Council has funding provided for in the Long-term Plan. However, external funding partners will be required before completion is started. Legal implications There are no issues within this report requiring legal advice. Attachments The proposed location plan for Awarua to Bluff follows on the next page.



Page 14

Location Plan Awarua to Bluff



Page 15

Item 3 Recent Resource Management Act Case Law

MORF ID: A36411 Strategic Direction: Focus Area One: Land Water and

Coastal Management

Report by: Joanna Gilroy, Team Leader Consents Approved by: Anita Dawe, Policy and Planning Manager


Purpose To provide an update on recent High Court and Environment Court cases that have implications for how Council interprets and applies the Resource Management Act 1991.

Summary The outcomes of cases from the Environment Court, High Court and Supreme Court on resource management issues provide “case law” on how the Resource Management Act (the Act) should be applied and interpreted. This report outlines findings and implications from three recent Court cases – Davidson, Horizons and Mackenzie. All of the cases have implications (general and specific) for Council, including how the Act is interpreted, how plans are implemented and developed, and how consent applications are considered. Recommendation It is recommended that Council resolve to note this report and the findings of the cases. Report Background Case law is an important part of determining how the Resource Management Act (the Act) should be applied and interpreted. Often these cases have implications for policy and plan development, as well as decision-making on consent applications, and mean that the application of the law changes over time. There are three recent cases that are significant to how the Act is applied that Council should be aware of, to ensure Council that is applying the law correctly. This report provides a brief summary of each case and then discusses the implications for Council. Current situation

Summary of the cases

R J Davidson Family Trust v Marlborough District Council

The case is in relation to an application from the R J Davidson Family Trust to establish a mussel farm in Beatrix Bay, Marlborough Sounds. The appellant had applied for consents to establish a 7 hectare mussel farm, but had been refused consent by the Council, and the Environment Court upon appeal. Key findings from the High Court relate to the consideration of Part 2 of the RMA when making decisions on consents, and also in the development of objectives and policies in plans.



Page 16

Fish & Game v Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council

Fish & Game sought an Environment Court declaration that the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council (Horizons) had been failing to correctly implement the One Plan (Regional Plan). The declaration was sought largely because the Council had been assessing and approving consents in line with a Council made resolution, rather than the One Plan. When issuing the declaration, the Court found that: the Council had not adequately acted to protect water quality; the Council did not follow the Act, or the rules that it had developed through the planning

process; there were issues with the processing of consents, in particular those for farming activities; the resolution made by Council was unlawful and invalid.

Federated Farmers v Mackenzie District Council This case relates to declarations sought by Federated Farmers in relation to Mackenzie District Council’s proposed Plan Change 13 (PC13). The plan change was notified in 2007 and has been subject to 11 court decisions. The purpose of PC13 was to include provisions in the plan to protect outstanding natural landscapes and ecology by restricting the capacity to intensify land productivity through irrigation (colloquially known as the “greening of the basin”), limit some farming methods, and restrict where farmers could construct buildings. PC13 was opposed by many parties on the grounds that it would make farming unviable. This particular case focused on whether or not PC13 should be confirmed. Questions answered by the Court included - if the policies in the plan change effectively implemented the objectives of the district plan; were the rules effective; and would the proposed rules and policies result in a more efficient use of the resources than the status quo? The decision of the Court was to confirm the plan change, but with a few minor changes. This decision has subsequently been appealed.

Implications / Risks All of the cases have implications (general and specific) for Council. These include how the Act is interpreted, how plans are implemented and developed and how consent applications are considered. These implications and risks are discussed below. Plan implementation The declarations in the Horizons case are wide-ranging and have implications for other councils. Primarily, the declaration shows the importance of implementing a plan. A key issue in the case was the Council’s decision to follow a resolution, rather than the plan it had developed through the RMA process as the basis for decision making. In turn, this then had implications for the robustness of any decision-making process and for the ability of the Council to implement the plan, in particular, rules relating to intensive farming. Issues with plan implementation then led to criticisms in the declaration that the Council was failing to protect water quality. This case shows that if submitters to a plan perceive that it is not being implemented, or if decisions on consents are not legally robust and made in accordance with the Act, there is the risk of legal action and losing credibility. Even if Council is found to be implementing the Act and its plans correctly, a legal challenge would be costly and time consuming.



Page 17

The Court’s declaration on the Horizons case also supports the trend in case law since the King Salmon decision in 20141 that plans are the key documents for decision-making and their provisions must be implemented. In this case, Horizons was attempting to support farmers transitioning towards achieving the limits set in the plan by granting consent for activities showing reductions in nitrogen leaching. The Court’s findings emphasise the need to consider non-compliance with limits very carefully, and particularly the cumulative effects of non-compliance. This shows that Council needs to carefully consider the balance between implementing a plan and supporting stakeholders. Consent processing The Court’s findings on the Horizons case provide clear direction on how councils should receive and process resource consent applications, and the types of matters which can be appropriately included in supporting documents such as management plans. Following the release of this decision, staff have reviewed Council practice and confirmed it was processing applications in accordance with the Court’s findings. In recent months, Environment Southland staff have been helping Horizons improve its practice by processing consents and giving advice on practice improvements. In the King Salmon decision, the Court determined that when making decisions on proposed plans, in general, there is no requirement to refer back to Part 2 of the Act.2 In the case of Davidson, the Court upheld the King Salmon decision that when making a decision on a consent under Section 104, a decision-maker, in general, does not need to refer back to Part 2 of the Act. This means that unless a lower order planning document contains provisions which have not given effect to Part 2 or contains provisions which are invalid, incomplete or uncertain, then a decision on a consent can be made on the policies and objectives based in the relevant plan.3 The Davidson case confirms that the Act has a planning cascade, meaning each document intends to ultimately give effect to Section 5 and Part 2 of the Act. The case was decided by the High Court and has now been appealed by the applicant to the Court of Appeal. This means the interpretation could change, but, until that time, the High Court decision provides direction on how consents should be processed and considered. Nitrogen leaching limits and their relationship to consents and management plans were discussed in the Horizon’s declaration. The Court considered it was inappropriate to set parameters such as nitrogen leaching limits in a management plan, which Horizons had been doing. The Court stated that parameters should be set in the consent, with management plans supporting the achievement of the parameters by providing information on how they could and would be met. The approach of using advice notes in order to “update” nitrogen leaching limits in management plans was considered unsuitable by the Court, as advice notes are uncertain in nature and effect, and likely to present compliance and enforcement problems. This is a matter which Council will need to be aware of when deciding how to deal with management plans and nitrogen leaching limits, as part of any consent or plan development process.

1 Decision of the Supreme Court on appeals in relation to a proposal to establish salmon farms in the Marlborough Sounds. This decision had

ramifications for plan development, plan interpretation and decision making on consents. 2 Buddle Findlay (2014) Implications of the New Zealand King Salmon Supreme Court Decision. https://www.buddlefindlay.com/insights/implications-of-the-new-zealand-king-salmon-supreme-Court-decision/#_ftn3 3 R J Davidson Family Trust v Marlborough District Council [2017] NZHC 52 at [76 and 77]



Page 18

Plan and policy development A key implication as a result of the Davidson decision is the additional importance which will be placed on the wording of objectives and policies in plans. This is because we can no longer rely upon the “overall broad judgement approach” and determining consistency or otherwise of the provisions with Part 2 of the RMA.4 Consequently, Council will need to ensure that any plan and policy statement gives effect to Part 2 of the Act and any policies and objectives contained within them provide complete coverage, and are clear and certain. The Court found that it would be inconsistent with the Act to allow regional plans to be rendered ineffective by continuing to allow general recourse to Part 2 of the Act when making decisions on consents. Consequently, the Court has shifted the emphasis back on the contents of the plans, with the need for clear and meaningful plans which then guide consent decisions. It also supports the need for drafting a plan with clear provisions and a plan with complete coverage of issues. The Davidson decision is likely to affect the drafting of, and mediation on, new plans and plan changes. In the past, submitters and Council staff alike may have been accepting of “imperfect” drafting, because the recourse of Part 2 was available under the “overall broad judgment approach”.5 However, it will now be more important to ensure that objectives and policies are clear and say exactly what they mean. Matters of discretion and control may also need to be more comprehensive. Plan drafters will also need to ensure that all aspects of Part 2 are reflected in plan provisions, rather than relying on Part 2 to “complete the picture” when resource consent applications are assessed.6 The Mackenzie declaration discussed the approach taken to Section 293 of the Act, where the Environment Court may order changes to a proposed plan and policy statement. The Court held that the application of King Salmon means that they should only resort to Part 2 of the Act if the other (unamended) objectives of the plan and/or objectives and policies or any later, higher order instruments are incomplete, ambiguous or illegal.7 Consequently, the role of the Court was twofold – firstly, to confirm that the objectives, policies and methods in Plan Change 13 were in accordance with the functions of the Council under Section 31 of the Act, in particular, integrated management of the effects of development, use and protection of resources; and, secondly, to confirm that the plan change and provisions within it did not depart from higher order statutory instruments.8 This has implications for Council in that it shows the importance of plan drafting and also the role that the Court may be taking when making decisions on appeals and declarations on proposed plans. The Court in the Mackenzie declarations also examined the risk of acting, or not acting, in relation to the potential loss of biodiversity and how this related to the risks to farming viability. It was found that there can be no approach that says that, if a farm is made financially non-viable then there should not be protection of an Outstanding Natural Landscape. The Court’s decisions was informed by the case of Day v Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council where nitrogen loss limits were put in place and a farmer was unable to meet them.9 In this case, the Court concluded that the farmer would have a decision to make - seek consent for a higher activity status activity, change the farm system, or change the intensity of the farm to comply with the lower limit. The Court concluded that this was what any business operator would need to consider when a rules regime changed and that nothing provides

4 Kensington Swan (2017) High Court case changes how resource consent applications will be considered. https://www.kensingtonswan.com/Legal-Updates-And-Events/Newsflashes/High-Court-case-changes-how-resource-consent-appli.aspx 5 Russell McVeagh (2017) New Zealand King Salmon decision now extended to resource consents. https://www.russellmcveagh.com/insights/february-2017/resource-management-update-february-2017 6 Ibid., 2. 7 Federated Farmers of NZ v Mackenzie District Council [2017] NZEncC 53 at [158] 8 Ibid., 159. 9 Ibid.,521



Page 19

farmers with a more privileged place. Whilst a different set of circumstances apply, general principles of this discussion may be applicable to future planning processes. The Court also found that, in the context of concerns about the long-term viability of farms, effects on biodiversity should be assessed objectively rather than based on a landowner’s subjective view. The Biodiversity Chapter of the proposed Regional Policy Statement is aligned to this approach, as it requires ecological assessments for activities that may affect areas of indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna. The Mackenzie declarations also discussed the inclusion of maps in the plan. The proposed plan contained a visual vulnerability map sized at A3. It was asserted by Federated Farmers that the map showed too large an area on too small a map, so the topographic detail could not be seen and that it had not been checked on the ground. It also argued that the map did not adequately assist farmers in determining boundaries between two zones10. The Court held that the map would be able to be transferred to other scales and was considered effective enough to be added to the plan.11 The majority of this Council’s plans contain maps and there is a move towards spatial planning, so this finding provides some confidence in relation to Council’s use of maps. Next steps No further steps are required. Fit with strategic framework Focus Area Contributes Detracts Not applicable

Land, water and coastal management x

Air quality x

Biodiversity & biosecurity X x

Risks and natural hazards x

Transport x

Maori and Governance x

Engagement and Partnership x

Science, technology and knowledge x

Views of affected Parties There are no matters in this report which require consideration under this heading. Compliance with Significance and Engagement Policy There are no issues within this report which trigger matters in this policy. Considerations Financial implications There are no current additional policy or planning costs.

10 Federated Farmers of NZ v Mackenzie District Council [2017] NZEncC 53 at [273 and 376] 11 Ibid.,376.



Page 20

Legal implications There are no legal issues or risks at present. However, Council needs to continue to ensure that it makes legally robust decisions on consents, implements Council planning documents, and drafts clear and certain provisions in plans. If not, there is the risk of declarations being sought from the Environment Court, or matters being appealed to the High or Environment Court. Attachments None



Page 21

Item 4 Recently Released Water-related Reports

MORF ID: A34610 Strategic Direction: Focus Area One: Land, Water and

Coastal Management

Report by: Joanna Gilroy, Team Leader Consents and Felicity Durand, Senior Policy Planner

Approved by: Anita Dawe, Policy & Planning Manager


Purpose To highlight and provide a summary of recently released water-related reports from the Ministry for the Environment, and a report on the Pastoral 21 research programme from the annual Fertiliser and Lime Research Centre conference. Summary The Ministry for the Environment and other groups regularly circulate reports to councils on work that they have been involved in. Several of the reports are from the Community Environment Fund and the Freshwater-Economic Capability building fund. All of these reports have been summarised below and provide information about water quality and quantity based research. The relevance of the reports to Council is also discussed. Recommendation It is recommended that Council resolve to note the eight reports and their findings. Report Background A Summary of key messages from the Pastoral 21 Programme (Fertiliser and Lime Research Centre) Pastoral 21 was a jointly funded research programme which ran from 2011 to 2016. The aim of the project was to provide options to reduce the losses of Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorus (P) from farms, whilst increasing production and profitability. Four farmlets around the country were used in the programme, with two farming systems used on each site – a current and a future system. The future systems aimed to achieve the goals of increased profits and decreased nutrient losses to water. Their designs were based on farm system modelling, so they were established with the aim of testing whether modelled benefits to nutrient losses and profits would actually occur. Under the future systems the reductions in N leaching were in line with what was predicted by the models. The authors conclude that the effects on production were generally slightly negative, associated with reduced feed production from lower N inputs. P loss reductions were achieved by protecting vulnerable areas of landscapes, such as critical source areas. The paper noted that the research programme has been less successful in raising farm profitability. The programme created options for farming within environmental limits, but profit is also considered



Page 22

in the paper to be a key part of sustainability. The paper concludes that more cost-effective measures are required, especially more affordable measures to replace stand-off facilities. The implications of this specific report for Council are low, but the findings of the wider pastoral 21 programme are relevant, as the project has implications for Council’s understanding of ways to reduce losses from farms. Engaging Farmers in Improving Water Quality: The Rere Story (prepared for Gisborne District Council) This report is about the Rere Project that the Gisborne District Council undertook with partners, including local farmers, to improve water quality in the Wharekopae River. This river has two iconic swimming sites where water quality was not meeting swimming water standards. Key ingredients in the project that the report identifies include interagency collaboration, taking a farmer centred and community based approach, connecting water quality improvement to a local treasure (the swimming hole), making a strong case for change, including clear links to farm practices, and using incentives to encourage famer engagement. The report notes that engagement of farmers in the project was hampered by a lack of interest or perceived lack of relevance to their farm; the thought that water quality was “not that bad” and not being able to afford to make changes on farm. As a result of the project some farms have made significant changes. Key outputs include new fencing, new water reticulation systems, more water quality monitoring, management plans and fewer E. coli exceedances. The MfE hopes the findings from the project will be useful for other community-based water quality initiatives. The findings of this report are relevant to Council, as it provides information on a successful community-based water quality initiative and an indication of methods that Council may want to consider using in any future community-based projects. A Farm-scale E.coli model for Gisborne District Council (prepared for Gisborne District Council) The purpose of the project was to develop a model of the cost-effectiveness of appropriate mitigation options to address faecal contamination of the Wharekopae River in Gisborne and to support the work being completed on the Rere Project. The report outlines the development of the modelling of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of mitigations to reduce E. Coli losses from sheep and beef farms. Estimations were made for stream fencing, eliminating stream crossing points, changing stock types and land use change to forestry. The aim was to collate the best information available on the effectiveness of measures to reduce E. coli discharges to water, with the focus on mitigations that would impact on streams in dry weather periods. As a result of the case studies, a series of general patterns in the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the modelled mitigation measures were produced. For example, the cost-effectiveness of stream fencing is reduced when a reticulated stock drinking water system is needed, but the reticulated system could have benefits for the farm with the costs being offset by increased production. The results are typical patterns for the Wharekopae catchment and may not be directly transferrable to other areas. The aim is to widen the use of the programme to help farmers prioritise planning and implementation of mitigation measures. The findings of this report are relevant to Council, as it provides information on a topic which is of interest to many parties – where to target spending to get the environmental outcomes you are



Page 23

aiming for. This report and the methods used could be beneficial to Council, in terms of information to support water quality related projects. Nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and fluxes in drainage from pasture, winter forage crop and native bush sites in the West Matukituki Valley (AgResearch) The report provides an explanation of results of the monitoring of Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorus (P) concentrations and fluxes in leachate from pasture, forage crop and native bush sites in the West Matukituki Valley. This monitoring was a result of mediation on Otago Regional Council’s Plan Change 6A, which was introduced to address water quality issues in the region. The information was needed to improve the understanding of nutrient losses from sheep and beef farming systems, sites in high rainfall areas and sites located on soils with low soil water holding capacities. The information will be used to reduce uncertainty around nutrient loss risk predictions from models and to support community processes for environmental management. The report concludes that further work is needed in relation to the relatively large fluxes of dissolved organic N and P, in order to allow comparison with a more detailed review of the scientific literature and to consider whether it is possible to factor these forms into models of nutrient flows and losses. The implications of this report for Council are low. However, it does provide detail about how the Otago Regional Council tried to reduce uncertainty around nutrient loss risk predictions from models. Regional Economic impacts of the Makauri Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme, Gisborne The report is about the potential economic impacts of Gisborne District Council’s proposed Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) scheme. This involves water from the Waipaoa River being injected into wells in the Makauri Aquifer. The report outlines the use of an input-output analysis to calculate economic impacts in regard to changes in industry added value and employment. Input-output analysis is one of the most widely applied methods in economics, being popular in the study of regional level economic impacts. In the assessment the report models four scenarios:

MAR implemented, 30% increase in water and no aquifer decline;

no MAR and 30% decrease in water;

no MAR and 60% decrease in water; and

MAR implemented 30% increase in irrigable area and no aquifer decline. The report found that scenarios without the MAR led to a negative effect on national and regional added value and employment. Value added and employment were positively impacted with the MAR and the largest positive impacts with the MAR, no aquifer decline and increased irrigable areas. It concluded that the impact and cost of the MAR will not have an impact on the regional economy, but it would have significant cost to those who paid for it at the farm and organisation level. The implications of this report for Council are low. The key matter of interest from the report is the use of input-output modelling, which may be of use for calculating region wide economic impacts of any projects.



Page 24

Practical tools and frameworks for freshwater policy development: application in the Kaituna-Pongakawa-Waitahanui and Rangitāiki Water Management Areas (Bay of Plenty Regional Council) This project was divided into three sub-projects - causal loop diagrams, risk and uncertainty, and management options and assessment criteria. In the first project, members of a community group and council staff developed a causal loop diagram for a catchment by identifying factors and relationships that influence or are influenced by freshwater quantity and quality. The result was a simple and accessible diagram showing the system and the complex relationships within it. In the second project, Council staff applied the principles from MfE’s Draft guide to communicating and managing uncertainty when implementing the NPS-FM in two catchments. The outcome was improved understanding of how to identify, assess and communicate risk and uncertainty and incorporate this information into decisions about implementing the NPS-FM. The final project developed, tested and documented an approach for developing and evaluating options for meeting freshwater objectives. A literature review was done first to provide an overview of the key concepts and how to use them. This was followed by a workshop held with Council staff from a range of disciplines to identify management options for a catchment then develop and use criteria to assess the options. Participants also identified ways to measure to degree to which criteria were being met. The findings of this report are relevant to Council. This is because Council staff could use the lessons from these projects as a starting point for discussions with the community as the limit-setting process begins. Native fish spawning areas in two Tairawhiti catchments: identification and community restoration project (Gisborne District Council) The purpose of this project was to identify, protect and enhance inanga spawning sites in two catchments in the region. The project was funded by the Ministry for the Environment’s Community Environment Fund and was a finalist in the 2017 Green Ribbon Awards. A steering group comprised of Council staff, Department of Conservation staff, local iwi, and the Tairawhiti Environment Centre was established and supported by a researcher with expertise in the local area. The group came up with a method for identifying spawning sites, which could be used by the community (especially schools and the Tairawhiti Environment Centre). Five sites were identified and habitat improvements were made by removing willows and installing artificial habitats. This proved successful with spawning occurring within the artificial habitats. In the longer term, planned planting programmes will restore the native habitat in these areas. Artificial habitats will support spawning in the interim. The Council aims to protect and monitor the existing sites and support community groups and schools to identify and protect other sites. A teaching resource was developed to assist. The implications of this report for Council are low. However, it does provide a possible method to be used to undertake monitoring and to engage the community in projects.



Page 25

Models for estimating sediment yields in the Waikato – Auckland – Northland Region: a comparison (Auckland Council) The councils have an existing model for identifying mean annual sediment yield based on catchment characteristics such as average slope, mean annual rainfall, land cover, and lithology. The problems with this model are that its standard error is larger than ideal and it cannot pinpoint sources of sediment because it is based on catchment averages. The purpose of this research was to develop and test a new model that would more accurately predict mean annual sediment yields and also identify critical source areas of sediment. The new model was tested against several national models by comparing yields predicted by the models with observed yields. The research showed that the new model was substantially more accurate for predicting sediment yields, but that one of the existing national models (Landcare Research’s SedNetNZ) was best for identifying sediment sources. Both models require a specialised GIS-based application to implement, which is not very user-friendly. The researchers recommend using both models to improve data and reporting on sediment in these regions, and incorporating the models into a more user-friendly GIS-based application so that it is able to be used by non-specialist Council staff. The report is relevant to Council, as it relates to the development of a model to more accurately predict annual sediment yields and critical source areas. However, until the issues raised in the paper with the models are addressed the implications for Council are low. A Computable General Equilibrium approach to urban freshwater planning (Auckland Council) The Chief Economic Unit at Auckland Council is currently developing a sub-regional housing Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model. CGE is a methodology that models the economy and the various inter-relationships between economic sectors, and is useful for capturing the effects of a new policy or external shock that affects economic activity. The purpose of this report was to improve understanding of the potential and challenges of expanding the sub-regional CGE model to account for the impacts of freshwater management policies on economic growth and development. The report concluded that a CGE model would be beneficial for assessing the economic implications of freshwater and other environmental policies. The authors considered that a sub-regional CGE model at FMU levels would be necessary in order to conduct robust economic impact analysis of proposed freshwater policies. Such a model would require a large amount of detailed data. In Auckland a programme of work to improve data collection and recording is underway, with the intent that it will eventually feed into an economic model. This report and its findings are relevant to Council because it cites the Southland Economic Model for Fresh Water being developed within the Southland Economic Project as being one of two examples of regional CGE models already being undertaken for water management. The Southland Economic Model for Freshwater will report on the direct and wider economic impacts of various “what if” scenarios and compare these results to a baseline scenario. Results will be reported at various scales and using several economic measures. In both the Southland and Auckland cases it has been noted that such models are an enormous undertaking and have potential applications for the regions far beyond water management.



Page 26

Fit with strategic framework Focus Area Contributes Detracts Not applicable

Land, water and coastal management x

Air quality x

Biodiversity & biosecurity x

Risks and natural hazards x

Transport x

Maori and Governance x

Engagement and Partnership x

Science, technology and knowledge x

Views of affected parties There are no matters in this report which require consideration under this heading. Compliance with Significance and Engagement Policy There are no issues within this report which trigger matters in this policy. Considerations Financial implications There are no current additional policy or planning costs. Legal implications There are no legal issues or risks at present. Attachments None



Page 27

Item 5 Ongoing Matters

Agenda Item No: 5.1 Subject Matter: Policy and Planning Division Work Programme including External Agency Reports

MORF ID: A208812 Strategic Direction:

Report by: Anita Dawe, Policy and Planning Manager


Executive Approval: Vin Smith, Director of Policy, Planning & Regulatory Services

Purpose For Council to note the Policy and Planning Division work programme, which will be updated for each Strategy and Policy Committee meeting. This item will also include a summary of recent reports and discussion papers received from external agencies that may be of interest to Councillors. Background The work programme (shown on the following pages) provides Councillors with a summary of the work priorities, resource implications and project progression for the Policy and Planning Division. In addition, staff have identified that there is no systematic approach to ensure that Councillors are made aware of reports and discussion papers that are released, especially when a Council submission is not required. These documents are released throughout the year, often by central government or non-government organisations such as Local Government New Zealand. In some cases, a staff submission may be prepared. Staff have included two tables on these documents in this report so that Councillors are aware of them.

Agenda Item No: 5.2 Subject Matter: Science Update

MORF ID: - Strategic Direction:

Report by: John Prince, Environmental Information Manager

Approved by: Graham Sevicke-Jones, Director of Science & Information

Executive Approval: Graham Sevicke-Jones, Director of Science & Information

At the Strategy and Policy Committee meeting on 2 February 2017, Cr Rodway requested that science presentations be given at future meetings of the Committee - 15 minutes at the most. Today, staff will present an update on work being undertaken to develop a multi-agency Science and Monitoring Strategy for the Southland region to set the direction going forward for the next 10 to 20 years.

Recommendation It is recommended that Council resolve to note the following Ongoing Matters: Policy and Planning Division Work Programme including External Agency Reports Science Update



Page 28

Policy and Planning Division – Current Work Priorities

Updated 16 August 2017

Table 1: Main work areas

Project Deliverables Milestones Contribution to Levels of Service

Last progress update (5 July 2017) Current progress update (16 August 2017)

Air Plan Stage 2 Scoping report for Stage 2

Commence Stage 2 review Provision of legally robust policy framework

On hold. Awaiting the release of the draft NESAQ, anticipated to be in September 2016. This will determine the scope of the next review – and whether it will need to be a whole plan review, or just Stage 2.

No change from last update. Draft NESAQ still not received.

Biosecurity Assisting with review of Regional Pest Management Plan

As required by Biosecurity Division

Maintaining Regional Biodiversity

Project timeline developed, with an indicative draft document expected to be available by the end of 2017. A workshop with Council and key stakeholders has been arranged for 22 August 2017. The workshop’s main focus is to agree on the proposed pest candidates, to communicate the structure of the RPMP and to seek approval for an overarching (non-statutory) Biosecurity Strategy.

No change from last update.

Coastal Plan Project Plan for Stage One

Project Plan complete Provision of legally robust policy frameworks

Project Plan for Stage One complete. Work is underway to prepare a series of short discussion papers on marine farming, natural hazards, use and development, water quality and ecosystems, and natural character. The release of the discussion papers to core stakeholders will be staged between



Page 29



October 2017 and June 2018. All discussion papers will come to the Strategy and Policy Committee for approval prior to being released.

Coastal Heritage Inventory Project

Multiple projects to 2017/18

Contracts in place Te Ao Marama Inc has agreed to take over the financial and project management of the project for 2017/18 until the future of the project can be determined.


Council Planning Submissions to LGNZ, central Government, TAs and RCs

Variable Provision of legally robust policy frameworks We will provide quality stewardship of Environment Southland’s functions through robust decision making and public awareness.

Mediation on ICC’s District Plan is ongoing, with a further day on biodiversity scheduled for 12 July. Currently working through draft consent memoranda with ICC’s legal counsel.

Mediation on the Southland District Plan took place over 4 days in early August. All but one appeal was resolved through mediation. Council is a s274 party to the outstanding appeal point which is concerned with the clearance of indigenous vegetation. Input into applications for resource consent under District Plans. Since 4 July there have been two requests for written approval processed, a submission on a limited notified application, and two requests for comment on applications.

Environmental Code of Practice for River Works

COP approved for use n/a Flood Protection and control works

Draft assessment completed and being reviewed before presentation to Catchment Dept.


Long Term Plan LTP Assisting Corporate and Strategy Manager with LTP delivery. Final level of involvement yet to be confirmed.



Page 30



Long Term Plan – Fees & Charges Review

Updated fees & charges schedule into the LTP

Scheduled prepared for Council Comparison against other Regional Councils undertaken. Preliminary meetings with relevant Managers completed.

Managing unwanted vegetation in rivers project

Development of a concept plan

Watching brief and attendance at Working Group Meeting to provide advice.

Maritime Milford Sound Safety Management System

Carry out internal review Maintaining consistency with NZ Port and Harbour Safety Code.

Internal review complete, and sent to Maritime NZ. Deemed consistent with the NZ Port & Harbour Safety Code.

See Table 2

Maritime Bluff Safety Management System

Commencing internal review Maintaining consistency with NZ Port and Harbour Safety Code.

Complete. Deemed consistent with NZ Port & Harbour Safety Code.

See Table 2

Maritime Fiordland VHF project Stage one complete for Dusky Sound area

Improving VHF coverage for mariners in the Fiordland area in accordance with Council’s maritime responsibilities.

Co-siting agreement received from Maritime NZ, currently with ES for sign off. Work on the repeater site to begin in spring once site conditions are more favourable.

Equipment to be purchased and assembled/tested off site prior to installation.

Maritime Cruise Ship Deed of Agreement Review

Commencing review Maintenance of agreement between ES and the cruise ship industry

Request for proposal sent out to interested parties. Submission of proposal received from two organisations. Proposal evaluation and award by 14 July.

Preferred provider identified, request for further information being sought.

Natural Hazards TA referrals

Referrals / submissions complete

Provision of legally robust policy frameworks

There have been 29 natural hazards enquiries received between 25 May and 4 July 2017.

There have been 34 enquires received between 4 July and 11 August 2017.

Regional Natural Hazards Management Gap Analysis and Action

List of priorities to Co-ordinating Executive Group.

Ensure the region is resilient and able to cope with any civil defence emergencies.

The Reduction Working Group has made recommendations to the Co-ordinating Executive Group for its

The Co-ordinating Executive Group agreed with the Reduction Working Group’s recommendations for regional



Page 31



Plan Provision of legally robust policy frameworks

meeting on 7 July. The regional priority for risk reduction in Southland is better data/modelling for seismic, tsunami and sea level rise and flooding. The next step is to prepare a business case for LiDAR acquisition.

priorities: seismic, tsunami and sea level rise, and flooding. Priority has been given to holding flood protection workshops for Winton over Otautau and Invercargill. The business case for LiDAR acquisition is underway.

Transport Regional Land Transport Plan reviews

Review due for completion by April 2018.


RTC Meeting held on the 20 June to confirm strategic front section of RLTP Issues, Objectives and responses. Project to allow assessment and monitoring of the RLTP was approved with costs shared between ES, ORC and NZTA. Road Safety Group is involved in a Community Engagement project with NZTA that has been developed over the last 6 weeks. Project details are being finalised before being put into the public arena in early July.

Work is continuing on the RLTP review. A new monitoring framework is being developed to provide a better baseline for assessment of the success of the Plan in addressing the issues identified. A monitoring framework was part of the improvement plan that was identified in RLTP2015. The project is still on the required timeline for completion in April 2018. Our Community Engagement Project being developed in conjunction with NZTA is progressing well and likely to be ready for launch at the end of September.

Regional Policy Statement

RPS 2012 fully operative

Decisions notified; Decisions operative RPS fully operative by 30 June 2017.


Alternative relief has been agreed by F & B and ES on the Water and Coast chapters. This will enable the RPS to be made operative and has negated the requirement for an Environment Court hearing. Draft consent orders have been circulated to s274 parties and will

All signed consent orders have been received by the Court. Council approval to notify the operative RPS will be sought in September.



Page 32



be lodged with the Court as soon as they are agreed.

Water and Land

proposed Southland Water and Land Plan

Summary of submissions complete Further submissions Hearings

Implement the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management Provision of legally robust policy frameworks

Three weeks of hearings have now occurred – one in Invercargill and two in Gore. The Commissioners have also undertaken two site visits – one of Western Southland and the other of Eastern Southland.

Hearings have resumed, with week 4 (14 August) held at ES. Submitters included Ballance and Ravensdown, the Southland Conservation Board, the SDHB, as well as individual farmers from a range of sectors.

Water and Land

FMU process Workshops in July/August All decisions on how to run the FMU process made FMU process for Fiordland and the Islands commenced by June 2017


The People, Water and Land Strategy is shaping how we will deliver Catchment Limits.


Water and Land

FMU – Assessing information gaps in Fiordland / Steward Island FMUs

Council agenda item Implement the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management Provision of legally robust policy frameworks

The report from Kauati Consulting has been received but has not yet been approved for final release by Iwi.


Water and Land

The Southland Economic Project

Agriculture and Forestry Report Completion of Stage 1a of the Southland Economic Project


Agriculture and Forestry Report approved by Governance Group. Refer to separate agenda item for more detail. Workshop programmed for Thursday 27 April 2017.




Page 33

Table 2: Projects completed this financial year

Project Deliverables Contribution to Levels of Service

RPS RPS operative Provision of legally robust policy frameworks.

Maritime Bluff & Milford Sound Safety Management Systems Maintaining consistency with NZ Port and Harbour Safety Code.

Table 3: Recent external reports and discussion papers received by Environment Southland

Title / topic Organisation Stage of development

Brief summary Submission likely?

National Environmental Standard for Plantation Forestry

Ministry for Primary Industries

Final Establishes activity statuses for eight core forestry activities with environmental effects: afforestation, pruning and thinning-to-waste, earthworks, river crossings, forestry quarrying, harvesting, mechanical land preparation, and replanting. The NES-PF comes into force on 1 May 2018. There are likely to be significant implications for our Plans. An analysis will be provided at the next Council meeting.

N/A

National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management

Ministry for the Environment Final

Table 4: Upcoming reports and discussion papers

Projected release date Organisation Topic Submission likely?

October 2017 Ministry for the Environment Air Quality (amended National Environmental Standard) Yes

August 2017 Ministry for the Environment National Environmental Standard for Dam Safety Unclear

Documents

Strategy and Policy Committee - Environment Southland and... · (Economics) Approved by: ... Strategy and Policy Committee – 30 ... Implications/Risks The research highlights the