Comments on applications for referral under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020
Organisation Department of Conservation Contact person (if follow-up is
required)
Geoff Deavoll 027 536 7020
gdea voll@doc.govt.nz
Comment form
Please use the table below to comment on the application.
Project name Te Ara Tupua – Ngaranga to Petone s hared path
General comment The ta ble below outlines the Department of Conservations comments on the proposed draft conditions for Te Ara Tupua application. The ta ble is structured in a wa y tha t refers to the specific condition, then a general comment and finally s uggested a mendments.
Thi s wording i s intended to be helpful but a lternative wording of like effect may be equally a cceptable.
Section Comment Suggested amendment/s
PC.5(e) Insert “amended” … under clause (d), above, the amended
Management Plan will be deemed …..
EM.1 Recommend the EMP to be split into specific plans, e.g Lizard Management Plan, Avifauna Management Plan, Biodiversity Offsets and Compensation plan, Predator control/pest management Plan
AND in all conditions at the end of the condition add:
“The Consent Holder shall exercise this consent in accordance with the [document name]
plan.”
EM.3 Recommend that this section list actual and potential effects of the Project on lizard values and address residual effects.
Insert:
f. pest control to protect lizards (both resident and any translocated lizards) – site,
methodology, spacing, timing, frequency of control shall be outlined in the LMP
g. monitoring of pest control results –
methodology, spacing, timing, frequency shall be outlined in LMP
h. monitoring of lizard population outcomes – population targets, methodology, site, timing,
frequency, statistical analysis and reporting shall be outlined in the LMP
i. if lizards outcomes targets are not being met, then additional measures of pest control or other contributing factors shall be
addressed EM.5(a) Suggest shingle beaches have their own
section. They are a marine ecosystem that we are trying to protect, not just a place birds use to roost/forage
EM.5 EM.5(c) Recommend that more detail is required for (c)
Example of wording could be:
“Work will only be carried out outside of shorebird nesting times, i.e. April to end August”
And
Avoid works within 20m of any nesting shorebird
EM.6A(a) Recommend that more detail is required for (a).
If a dog confirms the presence of a penguin then work should be postponed.
Amend to include “If a penguin is discovered within the area, work will be postponed until nesting or moulting is complete.”
EM.6A(c) Reword to
Outside of breeding season works may only occur when penguins have been confirmed as absent
EM.6A Additional detail on the Avifauna
Management Plans should be included.
Insert:
“The Avifauna Management Plan will detail the size, location and thermal requirements of the created penguin habitat.”
&
“The creation of penguin habitat will be carried out according to the Avifauna Management Plan”
EM.6B Suggest 50m is a more appropriate buffer for nesting oystercatcher
EM.6B(a)(iii) Suggest adding this to a separate “shingle beach” section for clarity and certainty.
Rational for this is to see if Smeagol is present and protected it if it is.
EM.6B(d) This could also be included in a “shingle beach” section as it would aid in trying to preserve/restore the habitat
EM.6B(b)(iv) Insert:
construct temporary fencing a minimum of 20m in all directions around nest to ensure no people or machinery accidentally transgress into this area until nest is complete
EM.8(b) If the “clean-up” has the potential to disturb wild-life then a consultation with DOC clause should be added to ensure the appropriate permits are applied for.
EM.9 Suggest more specific detail is required. Insert
EM.9(c) “Implementation of the PMP shall commence as soon as practicable, and no later than 1 year following commencement of the Works.”
And
(d) “Pest Management shall be undertaken in accordance with the PMP to achieve the following outcome target pest densities, measured immediately prior to the breeding season for coastal birds
1) rat species - ≤5% tracking tunnel index 2) Mustelids – no detection
3) Cats – no detection”
And
(e) Pest management shall be undertaken in accordance with the PMP to achieve the following outcome for avifauna:
1) A statistically significant 20% increase in fledging rates of oystercatcher …..(Or a sensible target from Avifauna plan)
And
(f) pest control should also target feral and stray cats
Offshore habitats
Rename section Offshore habitats for birds
EM.11 Add “of the seafloor” … the offshore habitats, a survey of the seafloor of the proposed….
EM.11 Add “by suitably qualified marine ecologist” …. shall be undertaken by a suitably qualified marine ecologist to confirm ….
Additional section
Biodiversity Offsets and Compensation
Suggest the inclusion of a section called Biodiversity Offsets and Compensation.
Details that should be included are:
- Clear objectives
- Criteria for certification - The Biodiversity Offset and
Compensation Plan to include a description of the offset, the calculation basis, locations and management activities by which enhancements will be generated; details regarding the financial costs of site
management and how these will be secured in the long term (including the use of bonds if appropriate); monitoring to ensure that offset and compensation objectives are being met; reporting of the results of monitoring results; and a process for undertaking actions if offsetting or compensation targets are not being achieved as anticipated.
- A requirement for the Consent Holder to implement the Biodiversity Offset and Compensation Plan
- A timeframe for implementation of the Biodiversity Offset and Compensation Plan - A mechanism for protection of the offset and compensation sites
- Duration of offset and compensation measures (which should be at least as long as the effects of the project, ie in perpetuity)
EM.15 Insert new clause:
any offshore habitat that is constructed and is not regularly inundated by seawater shall have rat and mustelid control undertaken and described in the EMP
EM.16 (b) (i &
ii)
Suggest the order of these are switched.
Initial focus should be on habitat which will see an increase in biodiversity.
EM.16(e) Alternative locations or methods should be identified prior to consent if landowner approval has not been granted.
Insert:
Works shall not commence until written confirmation has been provided that it has in
place the legal agreement and/or other authorisations necessary to allow all measures listed in the Biodiversity Offset and
Compensation Plan to be carried out EM.16(e) If the requirements of the conditions here
are not able to be met DOC recommends a similar condition to that of EM.18
Insert:
If the requirements in EM.16(a) and (b) are unable to be achieved, any variation to the requirements shall be developed in
consultation with GWRC, DOC and the MWSG.
EM.19 If the requirements of the conditions here are not able to be met DOC recommends a similar condition to that of EM.18
Insert:
If the requirements in EM.19(a) and (b) are unable to be achieved, the treatment of stormwater may be varied if agreed by the Manager. Any variation to the requirements shall be developed in consultation with GWRC, DOC and the MWSG.
EM.19(d) Alternative locations or methods should be identified prior to consent if landowner approval has not been granted.
And
Additional detail on quality of planting is required.
Insert
“Works shall not commence until written confirmation has been provided that it has in place the legal agreement and/or other authorisations necessary to allow all measures listed in the EMP to be carried out.”
And
“The plantings will achieve 80% coverage over 5years following planting.“ (or a sensible target as set out in the EMP)
EM.22(c) Insert “incrementally” … mussels that will be incrementally deposited over ….
EM.22(d)(i) There is a need to confirm mussel beds were formerly present on the seafloor in
Wellington harbour. They are currently present on the rocks but that's different. On the rocks they are part of a habitat. On the seafloor they form a biogenic habitat. That means big changes for soft sediment
communities and big implications for species that normally live on the seafloor.
Insert
“include a review showing where soft
sediment mussel beds were formerly present in Te Whanganui-a-Tara”
EM.22(d)(i) Recommend a survey is undertaken to make sure seafloor habitat isn't used by other organisms (e.g., spawning fish)
Add another condition
“to ensure the seafloor habitat is not used by other species including spawning fish”
EM.22(d) Insert
“a comprehensive study of Te Whanganui a Tara by a suitably qualified and experience marine ecologist”
EM.22(d) Add “a monitoring framework” and detailed measures of success”
Insert
…. deployment method, monitoring
framework and detailed measures of success;
EM.22(d)(ii) Insert
… showing the proposed potential locations of the mussel …..
EM.22(d)(iii) Adult mussels need certain conditions to attach to the seabed:
a. hard substrate (e.g. large shells) b. High shell/sand seafloor content c. Appropriate water flow
d. Low suspended sediment
Rewrite
“the results of the study of seabed conditions outlined in EM.22(i) at proposed mussel bed location(s) outlined in EM.22(ii) show whether seabed conditions are suitable for adult mussels to attach and thrive (and for juvenile recruitment) including hydrodynamic
conditions, substrate type (e.g., silt, sand, shell) and water quality (e.g., SSC), plus details of the marine biodiversity (plants and animals) found at and adjacent to the proposed sites”
EM.22(d)(iii) Note soft sediment habitats have value as well. This is suggesting destroying an existing habitat and replacing it with another.
Insert
“information about the hydrodynamic conditions at the seabed (including current speeds caused by waves and tides) and
EM.22(d)(vi) Should this be moved to E.22A as it discusses the trial of mussel placement EM.22(d)(vi) Recommend including additional types of
trials – caged and uncaged.
Caged (prevent escape (mussels highly mobile) and predation)
1. Survival rates of uncaged adults (%tbc) 2. Minimal loss of condition (tbc)
Uncaged add to EM.22(d)(vi)(d) 1. Survival rates of (%tbc) 2. Show recruitment of juveniles 3. Minimal loss of condition (tbc)
EM.22(d)(vi)(d) Include “surviving the seeding process” and
“thereby successfully creating a minimum area of ecologically functional biogenic habitat”
Insert
…. That mussels surviving the seeding process are being ….
….. marine species thereby successfully creating a minimum area of ecologically functional biogenic habitat.
EM.22(d)(viii) DOC supports the value in long term monitoring as an opportunity to better understand mussel restoration. It’s suggested that consideration be given to a staged monitoring (2 yearly for 10 years and the 5 yearly thereafter)
Insert
“monitoring shall include measuring
biodiversity, mussel mortality, water quality (including turbity), benthic sediment quality, signs of sedimentation, rugosity (roughness) and habitat complexity.”
EM.22A This section is difficult to read and maybe as a result of some of EM.22 meant to be in EM.22A
EM.17, EM.22 and EM.22A need to align with each other correctly. They don’t appear to at this stage.
EM.23 Amend methods of pre-construction survey of shingle beach infauna to determine presence/absence of Smeagol.
Potential conditions include
Add initial habitat assessment
Retain on-site search via digging (if habitat assessment says Smeagol may be there)
Add eDNA sampling
EM.23(c) DOC would also request to receive the results of the survey
Insert
… shall be provided to GWRC and DOC within …
EM.23(d) If Smeagol are present keep translocation condition but note translocation is very tricky and DOCs confidence is low that any management response can be relied on. It would likely mean local extinction at site.
This would require an appropriate
mitigation/offsetting/compensation option to be added.
DOC would be more than happy to work with NZTA to find an appropriate option.
