Agenda of Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum

Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum Minutes

12 November 2021

Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum

Ngā Meneti

Open Minutes

Commencing: Friday 12 November 2021, 9.30 am

Venue: Whakatāne District Council Chambers, 14 Commerce Street, Whakatāne

Heamana

Chairperson: Cr Toi Kai Rākau Iti (Bay of Plenty Regional Council)

Heamana Tuarua

Deputy Chairperson: Mayor Lyn Riesterer (Ōpōtiki District Council)

Ngā Kopounga

Members: Charlie Bluett - Te Runanga o Ngāti Awa, Deputy Mayor Andrew Iles – Whakatāne District Council, Trevor Ransfield - Te Upokorehe, Josie Mortensen - Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board, Marewa Titoki – Alternate, Te Waimana Kaaku, Cr Nándor Tánczos – Alternate, Whakatāne District Council, Tu O'Brien (via Zoom) – Alternate, Te Runanga o Ngāti Awa

Te Hunga i Tae Ake

In Attendance: Bay of Plenty Regional Council: Pim de Monchy - Coastal Catchments Manager, Tim Senior – Land Management Officer, Gemma Moleta - Senior Planner, Water Policy (via Zoom), Riki-Lee Ainsworth – Planner (via Zoom), Lisa Bevan – Environmental Data Officer (via Zoom), Amanda Namana – Committee Advisor

External: Gaylene Kohunui – Upokorehe (via Zoom), Ngaire Ngamoki – Upokorehe (via Zoom), Anita Lewis – University of Waikato (via Zoom), Mike Jones – Deprtment of Conservation

Ngā Hōnea

Apologies: Cr Debi Hocart - Alternate, Ōpōtiki District Council, Hori Hillman - Te Waimana Kaaku

1. Karakia Whakatuwhera
Opening Karakia

A karakia was provided by Charlie Bluett.

2. Ngā Hōnea
Apologies

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Accepts the apologies from Cr Debi Hocart and Hori Hillman tendered at the meeting.

Riesterer/Iles

CARRIED

3. Ngā Take Tōmuri
Items not on the Agenda

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Accepts the late item, appointment of the Alternate member for Te Waimana Kaaku

2 Agrees that the item cannot be delayed as the information has only just become available and this is the last meeting of 2021;

3 Agrees that the late item will be considered under the Chair’s Verbal update.

Iles/Riesterer

CARRIED

4. Whakapuakanga o Ngā Take Whai Taha-Rua
Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

5. Ngā Meneti
Minutes

Kia Whakaūngia Ngā Meneti
Minutes to be Confirmed

5.1

Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum Minutes - 11 March 2021

Matters Arising:

· Outlined the minute action process whereby any action items from each meeting were captured, monitored and progressed by staff.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Confirms the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum Minutes - 11 March 2021 as a true and correct record, subject to the following amendments:

· Remove ‘Alternate’ from Deputy Mayor Andrew Iles’ title as he is the Primary Member.

Bluett/Riesterer

CARRIED

10. Whakahoutanga Kōrero
Verbal Updates

10.1

Update from Whakatāne District Council

Presentation: Whakatāne District Council Update: Objective ID A3972243

Deputy Mayor Andrew Iles provided an update on matters relevant to the Forum, as the meeting’s host.

Key Points:

· Thanked Upokorehe for consultation with the roading team on safety improvements to State Highway 2 between Whakatāne and Ōpōtiki as the route was now safer and more pleasant to travel

· Ongoing concern over state highway network flooding highlighted the need for another bridge into Whakatāne

· Expressions of interest had been sought from tourist operators and food/ beverage vendors for the Ōhope Wharf reserve

· Ōhope Wharf was built in the 1950’s and was undergoing an upgrade including underneath structural work (already completed) and replacement of the deck

· This was likely the last external meeting to be held in the current Whakatāne District Council Chambers, with the building undergoing significant upgrade. The first meeting in the new ground floor Chambers was scheduled for March 2023

In Response to Questions:

· Noted there was a temporary speed reduction over the holiday period for part of Wainui Road and the permanent speed limit was under review.,

5.2

Chairperson's Report – Verbal Update

Tabled Document 1 - Te Waimana Kaaku letter appointing alternate member: Objective ID A3981538

Chair Cr Toi Kai Rākau Iti presented this item.

Resolved

· Noted the elevation of whakaaro Māori for treaty partnerships within the Resource Management Act (RMA) reforms

· A new Full Time Equivalent (FTE) staff member, Melissa Saunders, had been appointed as a Land Management Officer to support Ōhiwa Harbour mahi

· The Tino Rangatiratanga flag was now flying every day from each Bay of Plenty Regional Council office in Whakatāne, Tauranga and Rotorua

· Welcomed Marewa Titoko to the Forum as the new alternate member for Te Waimana Kaaku

· Outlined Regional Council’s Toi Tangata Plan.

Key Points - Members:

· It was a positive change to see Mātauranga Māori and Māori input being sought - this needed to be championed and employed in both operational work and policy so that it became second nature

· The utilisation of Mātauranga Māori, values and manaakitanga in everyday life was the seeking and finding of knowledge that Māori have which could assist in all aspects of mahi

· Whakatāne District Council also had Mātauranga Māori workstreams in progress.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Chairperson’s Report – Verbal Update;

2 Confirms the appointment of Marewa Titoki as the alternate member for Te Waimana Kaaku to the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum.

Bluett/Ransfield

CARRIED

Items for Staff Follow Up:

· An update to be provided at a future meeting on the connection between Mātauranga Māori and State of the Environment reporting..

6. Ngā Pūrongo
Reports

Hei Pānui Anake
Information Only

6.1

Engagement Opportunity - Values and Environmental Outcomes

Presentation: Engagement Opportunity - Values and Environmental Outcomes: Objective ID A3982074

Senior Planner (Water Policy) Gemma Moleta and Planner Riki-Lee Ainsworth presented this item.

Key Points:

· The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) had provisions that required greater tangata whenua participation and engagement with treaty partners. This included Te Mana o Te Wai being written into the NPS-FM; compulsory mahinga kai values and the opportunity for Mātauranga Māori to be used for measuring cultural values

· A key feature of the Freshwater Management Unit (FMU) was that there would be a vision in the Regional Policy Statement (RPS) which would be specific to the Ōhiwa Harbour FMU, noting that the harbour was the receiving environment for fresh water

· The group of attributes which needed to be measured included nitrogen, e-coli and sediment

· Ambitious, but reasonable goals with timeframes would be set, informed by history and environmental pressures

· Mahinga kai and wāhi tapu sites were only displayed on the public site if there were no sensitivity or confidentiality issues

· There was much known about Ōhiwa Harbour, but less about the freshwater catchment and the values associated with this

· There was opportunity to provide feedback on what was valued about specific freshwater sites and what needed changing, e.g. riparian planting or required weed control\

· Noted that all information provided on the Participate website page was public, whereas none of the information from the tangata whenua page was shared publicly

· There were two ways for Māori to engage under Te Honongo (the Regional Māori Engagement Plan for Implementing the NPS-FM), and multiple ways under the NPS-FM engagement process. Kanohi ki kanohi, had been the preferred method so far, potentially due to the desire to keep particular Mātauranga information secure.

Key Points - Members:

· Suggested community groups or a science project through schools would create opportunities to reach people and obtain the input required

· Whakatōhea was heavily involved with freshwater as it influenced the health of the mussel farms and processing factory, including the study of water out of the rivers. Mātauranga involved Rongoa and taiao and affected all operations, not just those pertaining to the harbour – this was about recapturing the health of the water

· Kutarere school had science programmes underway carrying out water testing and monitoring, which included estuaries, the awa at Waiotahe and the Ōhiwa Harbour

· Farmers’ practices around the tributaries feeding into Ōhiwa had downstream effects and the rules dictated how people utilised the land around Ōhiwa

· Recognition of historical tuna supply and where they had gone

· Acknowledged the continuous work of Care Groups around the waterways with fencing, riparian planting and working together for freshwater health.

In Response to Questions:

· There were other meetings underway with community and co-governance groups, notification in the Freshwater Flash, local newspapers, Facebook and Instagram, along with a number of other types of engagement

· Intensive community engagement was scheduled for 2023, when a clearer idea of implications was expected

· There was a separate process for tangata whenua engagement

· This stage of engagement was open until at least Christmas 2021, with opportunity for tangata whenua engagement to be further extended. It was anticipated that an NPS-FM draft document would be available in 2023, with an issues and options paper for community discussion

· Drinking water supply was one of the compulsory values under the NPS-FM which may be captured under the Three Water Reform. Improving ecosystem health would have implications on where the limits were set for stormwater and wastewater.

Items for Staff Follow Up:

· The Forum to be informed if gaps were identified in the cultural values information required as Regional Council had further resources to facilitate cross cultural conversations

· Requested a more detailed report on declining trends within the harbour and what actions were being taken to combat this

· Arrange an opportunity for further discussion and highlighting the use of the engagement tool.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Engagement Opportunity - Values and Environmental Outcomes.

Iti/Riesterer

CARRIED

10.57 am – The meeting adjourned.

11.18 am – The meeting reconvened.

6.2

Upokorehe pipi kaitiaki update

Presentation: Upokorehe iwi Kaitiaki update: Objective ID A3983625

Gaylene Kohunui and Ngaire Ngamoki presented this item.

Key Points:

· Pipi monitoring had occurred continuously from July-October 2021 during the holiday periods, with random monitoring undertaken in recent weeks

· Over a 25 day period, there had been more than 2000 people observed collecting pipi, which could equate to 300,000 pipi taken within that timeframe

· Was considering how to more accurately capture qualitative data

· Critical that information on customary permit application forms was filled in correctly

· During follow up, it was discovered that pipi was not always making it to places stated on permit applications

· Several people being able to fill out a permit for customary takes was concerning – Fisheries New Zealand had been approached about this and a hui would be called with permit holders to learn how to fill out permit applications correctly

· Positive feedback had been received for the explanatory brochure on pipi harvesting in Ōhiwa Harbour

· Decline had been noted in the pipi bed – with likely reasons being the way in which they were harvested (over-harvesting and the number of pipi wasted

· There had been increasing disruption at the bird sanctuary from visitors and suggested improved signage

· Provided an update on Upokorehe kaitiaki resourcing – 12 applications had been made for honorary fishery officers – 6 of which went through to final assessment with full training occurring in 2022. This was important for kaitiaki succession planning

· Another ongoing issue was Upokorehe whānau having to pay for their own printing, kai, travel, equipment, time and reporting, in order to be able to carry out this mahi. They welcomed support from Bay of Plenty Regional Council and from Ōpōtiki District Council

· With the pipi monitoring volunteers providing education and increased understanding a decline in breaches had been observed

· Vehicles on Tokitoki Reserve continued to be an issue, however fixing bollards and erecting a chain to limit access could be considered

· The Management Plan identified returning the pohutukawa taonga that used to be situated on Tokitoki Reserve, which had a lot of history and was currently sitting below the reserve.

Key Points - Members:

· Abuse of customary permits was of serious concern - purpose was primarily for tangi and permit issuers would welcome feedback around breaches in this context

· Commended the ongoing work and acknowledged the need for assistance

· Ōpōtiki District Council would consider how to assist in the return of the pohutukawa taonga to Tokitoki Reserve, in co-operation with the Department of Conservation (DOC)

· Noted that permit authorities anywhere had the right to write a permit and this needed to change.

Key Points - External:

· DOC advised that they were currently working on the resource consent renewal required for Tokitoki Reserve and would follow up with Gaylene to ensure relevant concerns were being addressed.

In Response to Questions

· To date, 500 brochures had been printed, with more than 200 distributed to people at the pipi beds, and the remainder given to organisations to hand out. Once more were printed, costs permitting, they would be given to campgrounds etc in the area.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Upokorehe pipi kaitiaki update.

Iles/Riesterer

CARRIED

6.3

Awhi Mai Awhi Atu Update

Presentation: Awhi Mai Awhi Atu Update: Objective ID A3983579

Land Management Officer Tim Senior presented this item on behalf of Dr Kura Paul-Burke – University of Waikato.

Key Points of Presentation:

· $3k of funding had been awarded from the Association of Sciences, Limnology and Oceanology (ASLO) to run sedimentation and water quality workshops in Ōhiwa Harbour

· Seastar bait trapping trials had begun in the harbour, with the purpose of identifying practical seastar management methods

· The third generation natural spat lines had been deployed during the Tangaroa phase of the maramataka

· Patangaroa project was progressing, preliminary results for collagen testing hoped to be available by early 2022. An article on this project would feature in NZ Seafood magazine in December 2021

· Mapping of the pipi and tuangi beds on the Western side of the harbour had commenced with purpose of compiling the first ever combined underwater and inter-tidal mapping of pipi and tuangi beds.

In Response to Questions:

· Suggested collaborating with the AgriSea Company in relation to extracting collagen from starfish for the purposes of cosmetics etc.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Awhi Mai Awhi Atu Update.

Iles/Riesterer

CARRIED

6.4

Baseline investigation of microplastic pollution in sediment and bivalves in the Bay of Plenty

Presentation: Microplastics investigation in the Bay of Plenty: Objective ID A3979557

Anita Lewis, University of Waikato presented this item.

Key Points of Presentation:

· Microplastics were plastic particles smaller than 5mm in diameter

· Entered marine environments through urban wastewater and drainage systems – wastewater treatment plants only caught macro plastics

· Microplastics bioaccumulated in the food web, with impacts on wildlife, marine life and humans

· Research showed this could affect reproductive qualities and growth of fish and shellfish

· There was potential for economic impact on the aquaculture export industry

· Sediment sampling had been carried out in locations from Waihi Beach to Ōpōtiki, including Ōhiwa Harbour

· 75% of Microplastics detected were microfibres from clothing, with 23% fragments and 2% film

· There were microparticles found in tuatua at each sampling location

· There was scope for future research and it was currently uncertain if the shellfish were mistaking microplastics for a food source.

Key Points - Members:

· Acknowledged the serious nature of the information and the importance of this research to start understanding the scale of the problem.

In Response to Questions:

· Microplastics were endocrine blockers and carcinogenic, with no safe level - the more ingested, the more potential for health issues

· Thresholds had not yet been established due to the early nature of this research

· Further research was being undertaken to look at Microplastic content in both the gut and the tissue of fish.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Baseline investigation of microplastic pollution in sediment and bivalves in the Bay of Plenty.

Ransfield/Titoki

CARRIED

6.5

Ōhiwa Harbour Marshbird Survey 2020

Presentation: 2020 Marshbirds Survey: Objective ID A3983408

Environmental Data Officer Lisa Bevan presented this item.

Key Points of Presentation:

· Regular surveys had been conducted since 2010 after the Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy was established

· The survey focused on five birds: banded rail, marsh crake, spotless crake, bittern and fernbird

· Bittern was classified as nationally critical (the same as kakapo), with the other four species classified as at risk/declining

· Outlined where each bird was found within the harbour

· Due to nesting habits, they were vulnerable to predation or any changes/degradation to their habitat

· First marsh crake ever recorded in the survey and although little was known about them, it was a positive addition to the list of rare birds in Ōhiwa Harbour

· The most common threats to habitat included human activity, grazing and pests. Staff would follow up with landowners at the four sites where grazing had been identified as a threat

· Data from Nukuhou Saltmarsh Care Group highlighted how successful pest control could be for these species. The group recorded 10 fernbirds in their 2003 survey, compared to 93 in 2020.

In Response to Questions:

· Mangrove control was not contrary to bird habitat as it had a focus on seedlings and it was the larger mangroves that the banded rail used for cover.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Ōhiwa Harbour Marshbird Survey 2020.

Mortensen/Ransfield

CARRIED

6.6

State of Environment for Ōhiwa Harbour and Catchment - 2021 Interim report

Presentation: State of the Environment Interim Report for Ōhiwa Harbour and catchment 2021: Objective ID A3983407

Environmental Data Officer Lisa Bevan presented this item, supported by Coastal Catchments Manager Pim de Monchy and Land Management Officer Tim Senior.

Key Points of Presentation:

· Advised that this was an annual interim report, with a comprehensive analysis provided in a State of the Environment report (SOE) every five years

· The biggest issue identified for Ōhiwa Harbour in the 2018 SOE was the estuary bed habitat health being moderate to poor due to the amount of fine mud. Monitoring over the summer period showed no change in the health of the estuary bed

· Five water quality parameters showed a worsening short term trend in the Nukuhou River

· The water quality monitoring for swimming and shellfish showed no exceedances, therefore swimming and shellfish consumption remained safe

· Short term trends in graphs were also impacted by short term climate changes that may affect water quality

· Nukuhou suitable whitebait habitat had been given a moderate score

· A collaborative new programme monitoring bittern across the Bay of Plenty used acoustic recorders, including five in Ōhiwa, for which there would be an update provided next year

Key Points - Members:

· Highlighted the importance of Pataua Island to Upokorehe

· Black swans in the harbour were an ongoing issue, they impacted the harbour by eating seagrass that was kai for fish species, including snapper.

In Response to Questions:

· Finding the right people at the right time for culling black swans had been a major challenge, combined with pressure from Fish and Game New Zealand who held a different opinion to the Forum around tolerable density when it came to black swans

· The current impact of black swans on the sea grass, and the wider impacts on other species in the harbour, were visible though not yet deemed significant

· Black swans were classified by Fish and Game New Zealand as a game bird and there was a special swan season weekend in February each year allowed through the Eastern Bay of Plenty Fish and Game Council that should be taken advantage of, noting permission from relevant landowners was required if private land was involved.

Items for Staff Follow Up:

· Report back to the Forum on the monitoring outcomes of the Nukuhou farm new effluent system and related downstream effects at Kutarere.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, State of Environment for Ōhiwa Harbour and Catchment - 2021 Interim report;

2 Requests a report on the impact of the black swans on the Ōhiwa Harbour sea grass and food chain;

3 Writes a letter to the Fish and Game Council requesting an extension to the hunting season for black swans under the Wildlife Act 1953 for Ōhiwa Harbour;

4 Requests that the Regional Council carries out black swan control during any black swan hunting seasons to reduce the impact on seagrass.

Ransfield/Mortensen

CARRIED

6.7

Responses to Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum submissions on Council Long Term Plans

Department of Conservation (DOC) Community Ranger Whitney Nelson responded to questions.

Key Points:

· Waste Minimisation Plan had to be submitted once publicly notified so that it could be correctly captured.

Items for Staff Follow Up:

· Staff to monitor progress on the actions and report back to the Forum at a future meeting.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Responses to Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum submissions on Council Long Term Plans.

Iles/Bluett

CARRIED

6.8

Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy annual work programme report for the year ending 30 June 2021

Presentation: Ōhiwa Work Programme Report 2021: Objective ID A3979607

Land Management Officer Tim Senior presented this item.

Key Points:

· Over the past year, staff had worked with farmers to fence off almost 35km of streams

· A demonstration was given of a new dashboard system that captured work undertaken, and could be filtered in a variety of ways, including by catchment.

Key Points - Members:

· It was important to understand why any actions were highlighted red in in the work programme progress column (i.e. not completed), and requested accompanying reason/s in future reports to identifying what was not working and why

· Raised the issue of silt and mangroves causing flooding at Kutarere – the awa was narrower due to being blocked.

In Response to Questions:

· Noted that some improvements had been made at Kutarere, however the expertise required to unblock the stream was complex and involved an engineering assessment, which would be undertaken, although outside the scope of the Forum.

Items for Staff Follow Up:

· Follow up with the Rivers and Drainage team and liaise with Upokorehe regarding the flooding situation at Kutarere and options to identify a way forward for this significant problem.

Resolved

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy annual work programme report for the year ending 30 June 2021.

Iles/Riesterer

CARRIED

7. Karakia Kati
Closing Karakia

A karakia was provided by Charlie Bluett.

1.43 pm – the meeting closed.

Confirmed

Cr Toi Kai Rākau Iti

Chairperson, Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum



Pūrongo Ki: Report To:	Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum
Rā Hui: Meeting Date:	26 April 2022
Kaituhi Pūrongo: Report Writer:	Malea Zygadlo, Environmental Scientist and James Dare, Environmental Scientist - Water Quality
Kaiwhakamana Pūrongo: Report Authoriser:	Julie Bevan, Policy & Planning Manager
Kaupapa: Purpose:	To provide context around the trend results for the Nukuhou river and how we use these results in understanding degradation.

Nukuhou Water Quality Summary

Whakarāpopototanga
Executive Summary

The Nukuhou River shows a number of worsening trends. This report outlines the context around these results.

· Trend analysis results need to be interpreted in the context of their analysis period. For example, worsening trends over the most recent ten-year period do not necessarily mean the site is degrading over longer periods.

· Context around the trends, including the time period, climatic influences and methodology changes, all need to be considered.

· Relative state (e.g., NPS-FM attribute bands) should also be considered when determining the ‘health’ of a site.

Ngā tūtohutanga
Recommendations

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Nukuhou Water Quality Summary.

1. He Whakamārama
Background

The Ōhiwa Harbour and Catchment – SOE Interim Report identified ‘worsening’ trends in the Nukuhou river for a number of water quality measurements. As this was an interim report, the trend results were not discussed or investigated. It was requested that some explanation around the trends were provided both in terms of the technical interpretation and what is being done about it. This report describes how we interpret trend results and provides context around the results.

2. Water Quality Results

2.1 Trend interpretation

Scientists use trend analysis as a key tool to understand changes in water quality. Results are used to evaluate changes in environmental state, assessing the effectiveness of management actions and policies, evaluating relationships between environmental conditions and the factors that influence them, and providing early warning of environmental problems.

While trends are widely used, it is important to understand the caveats that come along with interpreting trends; context is very important. For example, trends may indicate improving or worsening water quality, however the reason may be more closely linked to natural causes than human derived change, e.g., medium term climatic variability. Recent research has shown that even 10-year trends may be affected by climate variability, masking the effect of land use change.

A key aspect we must consider when interpreting trend results is the timescale we have used. To exemplify the effect a change in time period can have on trend results, Figures 1 and 2 and Table 1 shows the change from ‘improving’ trends to ‘worsening’ trends depending on if the full dataset or the 10-year dataset is used.

Both timeframes come with their issues. The Nukuhou monitoring site has data from 1991, however there was a lab methodology change between 2008 and 2009 which can be seen as a slight step change in the long-term record. Another complication is that river flow measurements are only available from 2011, which has also affected how we interpret data.

Trends calculated for the Nukuhou Catchment have mostly been displayed as 10-year trends, in recent years, to avoid the difficulties of dealing with the lack of flow measurements and lab methodology changes, as well as providing information that is reflective of recent land use activity. However, as mentioned above, 10-year trends may be more subject to climatic variability than longer time periods. This impacts trend results as the climatic variability can mask the effects of land use change.

Table 1: Trend results for each monitored water quality parameter. This table shows both 10-years of data and all data (since 1990s), and the comparison between flow adjusted and not for the 10-year data.

Time Period	Flow Adjusted	Parameter	Percent Annual Change	Trend Result
All	No	Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus	-3.0	Very Likely Improving
All	No	E. Coli	-0.5	Very Likely Improving
All	No	Ammoniacal-Nitrogen	-3.8	Very Likely Improving
All	No	Nitrate-Nitrogen	-1.0	Very Likely Improving
All	No	Total Nitrogen	-1.7	Very Likely Improving
All	No	Total Phosphorus	-0.6	Very Likely Improving
10 Years	No	Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus	-2.2	Very Likely Improving
10 Years	Yes	Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus	-0.6	Likely Improving
10 Years	No	E. Coli	2.0	Very Likely Worsening
10 Years	Yes	E. Coli	1.4	Very Likely Worsening
10 Years	No	Ammoniacal-Nitrogen	2.7	Likely Worsening
10 Years	Yes	Ammoniacal-Nitrogen	0.1	Likely Worsening
10 Years	No	Nitrate-Nitrogen	3.6	Very Likely Worsening
10 Years	Yes	Nitrate-Nitrogen	1.9	Likely Worsening
10 Years	No	Total Nitrogen	3.1	Very Likely Worsening
10 Years	Yes	Total Nitrogen	0.7	Likely Worsening
10 Years	No	Total Phosphorus	0.5	Likely Worsening
10 Years	Yes	Total Phosphorus	-0.7	Likely Improving

Chart, scatter chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 1: Timeseries of data at the Nukuhou NERMN water quality site for Total Nitrogen (TN), Nitrate-N (NNN), Ammnoniacal-N (NH4),). The blue dots and trend line are for the last 10-years of data.

Chart, scatter chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 2: Time series of data at the Nukuhou River water quality monitoring site for Total Phosphorus (TP), Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus (DRP), and E. coli. The blue dots and trend line are for the last 10-years of data.

2.2 Other information that informs degradation

Determining if a river, or part of a river, is actually degrading is very difficult. While trend analysis can appear to be a conclusive result, the context around that result is very important as explained above. There are other analyses that can add to our interpretation. These can include analysis of the state (e.g., average or median concentration), modelling results (e.g., SedNet), land use and management information, and comparison to similar rivers.

Figure 3 shows the median value from the Nukuhou monitoring site in comparison to the other monitoring sites across the region. Here we can see that all the measurements are below average when compared to other rivers. E. Coli, sediment (TSS and clarity), and ammoniacal-N (NH4-N) are identified as the measurements BOPRC would be most concerned about based on the state (concentration) information. The results from computer modelling exercises also need to be worked through alongside this information.

Figure 3: Comparison of the Nukuhou River water quality monitoring site against other River monitoring sites in the Bay of Plenty. The grey dot represents the sites 50^th percentile score (i.e., median value). (Sourced from the Rivers Water Quality 2020 Update)

2.3 Summary

Many water quality parameters in the Nukuhou are highlighted as attributes that need attention. When it comes to trend interpretation, it is important to keep I mind:

· The timeframe of the trend analysis.

· The potential influence of climate and other natural variables over that timeframe.

· The context of the state (concentration) of that parameter relative to other sites.

3. Ngā Whakaarohanga
Considerations

3.1 Ngā Mōrea me Ngā Whakangāwaritanga
Risks and Mitigations

There are no significant risks associated with this matter/subject/project/initiative.

3.2 Huringa Āhuarangi
Climate Change

The matters addressed in this report are of a procedural nature and there is no need to consider climate change impacts.

3.3 Ngā Pānga ki te Māori
Implications for Māori

Ōhiwa Harbour is recognised as a very significant place for Māori. Their relationship to it, particularly as a traditional māhinga mātaitai (food gathering place) is important. As Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy partners, tangata whenua are keen observers of the health of the harbour. Results, implications and mitigation are all regularly communicated and consulted with the tangata whenua partners.

3.4 Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori
Community Engagement

CONSULT

Whakauiuia

To obtain input or feedback from affected communities about our analysis, alternatives, and /or proposed decisions.

3.5 Te Hāngai ki te Pou Tarāwaho Rautaki
Alignment with Strategic Framework

This report details monitoring in accordance with the actions of the Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy.

3.6 Ngā Pānga ā-Pūtea
Financial Implications

There are no material unbudgeted financial implications and this fits within the allocated budget.

4. Ngā Mahi Whai Ake
Next Steps

A lot of work is already being undertaken and planned in the Ōhiwa catchment to improve water quality. In order to provide more context to the trend analysis, we propose that the trend results are presented both as 10-year trends and full data trends. The full State of the Environment report for the Ōhiwa Harbour is also due to be prepared next year. It is proposed that in this report, the trends and state are investigated and presented in a more complete format that considers the context outlined in this report.



Pūrongo Ki: Report To:	Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum
Rā Hui: Meeting Date:	26 April 2022
Kaituhi Pūrongo: Report Writer:	Tim Senior, Land Management Officer
Kaiwhakamana Pūrongo: Report Authoriser:	Chris Ingle, General Manager, Integrated Catchments
Kaupapa: Purpose:	Improving freshwater quality

Improving the quality of freshwater in the Ōhiwa catchment

Whakarāpopototanga
Executive Summary

The causes of poor water quality in the Ōhiwa catchment are complex and an improvement is going to take some years to become evident. The focus of the effort by Bay of Plenty Regional Council in supporting landowners with grant funding and expert advice, is on reducing sediment runoff which has a number of origins. Fencing and planting of streams is well underway along with a number of other initiatives.

Ngā tūtohutanga
Recommendations

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Improving the quality of freshwater in the Ōhiwa catchment.

1. He Whakamārama
Background

The fact that the quality of the Nukuhou River water is poor has been known since monitoring began in the 1990’s. The Nukuhou is the only Ōhiwa tributary to have long term water quality monitoring. Its sub-catchment covers 60% of the Ōhiwa catchment. Monitoring has recently begun on four other Ōhiwa tributaries to start to gain a more complete picture of freshwater quality throughout the catchment.

Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC) has a role in working with landowners and others to try to improve water quality. Efforts to make meaningful improvements began in about the year 2000 when the catchment was designated a focus area by the BOPRC land management team. In 2019 Council made the catchment a ‘focus catchment’, enabling further resources to be applied.

Poor water quality is the result of the use and management of the land over the last 150 years or so. It is an unintended consequence that wasn’t well understood by landowners, and certainly not quantified, until relatively recently. Thanks largely to BOPRC’s work in the catchment over the last 20 or so years, the majority of farmers and landowners now have a much better understanding of the issues and possible solutions.

While all of the water quality parameters monitored in the Nukuhou River are poor, the most significant of them, in terms of the impact on the harbour, is sediment. The increase in sediment flowing off the land would have begun with the clearance of the original forest cover for farming, with the other contaminants (nitrogen, phosphorus and bacteria) would likely have increased more in recent decades as pastoral farming became more intensive.

Pastoral farming is the largest land use in the Ōhiwa catchment (35%) with plantation forestry at 17% (though this has probably recently decreased). While production forestry does release significant amounts of sediment during the harvest and re-establishment period, most of the time forestry landuse is very stable and virtually no other contaminants are released. Agriculture releases more sediment, and other contaminants, over the long term.

Reversing the cumulative impacts of 150 years of farming is inevitably going to be a slow process. Almost any use of land results in water contaminants being produced and it’s not possible to completely prevent this. However, changes and modifications to the way land use is managed can reduce them over time.

It’s important to note that the harbour is naturally filling in with sediment and always has been, thanks in part to the light easily erodible recent ash and silt soils in the catchment. Human activities have however sped this process up considerably. Ōhiwa Harbour is not alone in this: studies of similar estuaries in the Waikato suggest that historical sediment accumulation rates were less than 0.5mm per year. Since European settlement, this has risen to almost 200 times the historical rate.

2. What needs to be done

Efforts to reduce sediment have been the focus of the work that BOPRC has been doing, alongside landowners. It’s safe to say that generally many of the interventions made to reduce sediment are also likely to have some beneficial effect on the other parameters by reducing or slowing the flow of water.

Phosphorus is bound to soil particles so reducing erosion will have a direct effect. The slower the water moves across the land, the more opportunity there is for plants to absorb excess nitrogen and for harmful bacteria to die off.

High sediment levels are caused by erosion which is basically soil being moved downslope, generally by water. Most of the soils in the catchment are recently formed ash soils on the slopes (from volcanic activity) or silty soils on the river and steam flats (from flooding). Both of these are easily moved by water. This movement happens in a number of ways, some more visible than others:

· Landslides and slips largely caused by heavy rain on steep slopes;

· Stream bank erosion, which is a particular problem in the Nukuhou River due to the loose soils and deeply incised river;

· Sheet erosion of recently cultivated land during heavy rain;

· Soil creep, a very slow but inexorable process caused by rain drops splashing soil particles downslope.

Heavy stock trampling and tracking can open up the soil and expose it to rainfall, exacerbating erosion of various kinds. Earthworks can also leave unstable soil subject to erosion.

There are a number of techniques that can be employed to reduce erosion (this is not an exhaustive list):

· Fencing off bush areas;

· Retiring steep land from farming altogether and planting it in exotic or native trees;

· Planting poplar poles to help hold unstable land;

· Fencing and planting stream banks to keep stock out a) to protect the bank from damage from treading and b) to prevent stock from directly contaminating the water;

· Constructing ponds or wetlands to trap sediment;

· Various methods of protecting stream banks by using shrub willow plantings, rock protection or groynes;

· Reducing stock numbers or grazing smaller animals on steeper slopes;

· Improved grazing management and stock rotation particularly during wet periods;

· Carefully planning earthworks;

· Careful location of fencelines and stock tracks;

· Minimising cultivation of steeper slopes.

The first six of the above techniques BOPRC is able to assist landowners with by way of grant funding. The rest are management techniques that need to be implemented by landowners, though BOPRC are able to provide advice.

In addition, there are a number of further management techniques that help to reduce some of the other contaminants, for example:

· Careful use of artificial fertilisers;

· Careful management of dairy effluent systems.

3. How BOPRC works with landowners

Apart from ensuring that farmers meet the conditions of any consents they may hold (eg. for dairy effluent systems or major earthworks), until recently there were very few regulations compelling farmers to carry out any of the above improvements. So BOPRC land management staff can only work with landowners on a voluntary basis. However farmers are increasingly aware that they need to manage their farms better, so the demand for land management advice and assistance is increasing.

Staff will either approach a landowner or vice versa to suggest some work that they would like to see done. After (often considerable) discussion this will result in the production of an Environmental Plan agreement (EP). This describes the proposed works (for eg. fencing off a stream), how and where they are to be done and allocates costs between the two parties. BOPRC is generally able to contribute 50% grant funding towards eligible work.

The work is very much a partnership between BOPRC and landowners.

4. What is being done

In the early 2000’s a significant effort was put in to “tidy up” the main river. This involved removing tree debris which was interfering with the flow of water and causing erosion of the banks. Old willow and walnut trees, which almost inevitably eventually fall into the river, were also removed. These were often replaced with smaller shrub willows. Some of the more serious erosion on some bends was managed by rock armouring. Any fencing required along the main river was completed to ensure stock were not able to access the river. This was all done using the EP mechanism.

A study by a river engineer to assess what more can be done to help prevent further erosion of the banks of the main river is about to get underway.

Stream, and more recently farm drain, fencing still continues, through EP’s, with planting of natives or shrub willows as and where appropriate. Fencing streams, particularly on steeper drystock farms, often then requires the installation of a stock drinking water system of pipes and troughs.

Also through EP’s, large numbers of poplar poles are being planted on some steeper slopes. Significant stands of bush are being fenced and landowners are being encouraged to retire some of the steepest areas.

In some gullies small bunds are constructed to help trap sediment before it reaches the main river. These generally have to be dug out periodically.

BOPRC also now has the capacity to assist farmers with the development of nutrient budgets. These budgets help farmers to optimise their use of fertilisers which is currently often not very precise and may be leading to more leaching and contamination than is necessary. Two farms have already had theirs completed.

Behind this work on the ground, continuous efforts are made to provide farmers with up to date information and recommendations about many aspects of their farm management. Other on farm changes are taking place, for example several dairy farms have reduced their cow numbers without any reduction in productivity.

5. What has been achieved

By 2012, the harbour margins were completely protected from stock.

By November 2021, approximately 504km of stream fencing had been completed, leaving approximately another 226km to complete. Most of the streams still unfenced are very small in the upper areas of the catchment and may be in areas where there are no stock, such as lifestyle blocks, so the amount left to do may actually be much less.

Since 2019, 25 EP agreements have been made with landowners. The graphic below illustrates the resulting work and the costs involved. It’s important to note that BOPRC have been actively seeking extra sources of funding and the Ministry for the Environment’s Freshwater Improvement Fund and the Ministry for Primary Industry’s One Billion Trees Fund have considerably increased the amount of work done.

It should also be noted that some farmers will be doing their own fencing and planting with no support from BOPRC, but the extent of this is not known. There is also a significant number of sediment traps and bunds that have been constructed by farmers themselves.

Hundreds of shrub willow poles are planted along stream banks each year and these are not included in the native plant numbers in the report card above.

As mentioned above, a stock drinking water supply sometimes needs to be installed when the streams are fenced. On one large property alone this requited the provision of 36 troughs, 2 large tanks, a pump and 11km of pipe at a cost of $170,000.

A number of pockets of bush have been incorporated into the stream fencing and three larger bush blocks have been fenced with pest control being carried out in some.

While the focus to date has been on the larger farms, lifestyle block owners (of which there are a large number in the catchment) are showing increasing interest in protecting their streams and often in large scale planting of most of their properties and several EP agreements are already in place.

6. What still needs to be done

The first priority has been, and remains, completing the stream fencing and planting with either natives or shrub willows where appropriate.

There is more poplar pole planting to be done on some of the steeper slopes and ideally some small areas retired from grazing altogether.

There are opportunities to construct more ponds and wetlands to trap sediment.

Once the engineering report on the river bank erosion has been completed, there is likely to be work to do protecting those banks.

Each farm ideally needs a nutrient budget to ensure effective fertiliser use.

Farmers need to continue to make incremental improvements to the way they manage their farms and BOPRC will back this up with training and learning opportunities for them where possible.

It’s hoped that very soon, landowners will form a catchment group which will facilitate a catchment wide coordinated approach to all this work.

It is important to remember that most of this work is voluntary on the part of landowners and relies on their goodwill, BOPRC is not able to require it to be done.

And finally, the issue we have has been 150 years or so in the making and it’s going to take some time to reverse. Even the fencing and planting done so far will not have an immediate effect – plants take time to establish and stream banks take time to heal.

7. Ngā Whakaarohanga
Considerations

7.1 Ngā Mōrea me Ngā Whakangāwaritanga
Risks and Mitigations

There are no significant risks associated with this matter/subject/project/initiative.

7.2 Huringa Āhuarangi
Climate Change

The matters addressed in this report are of a procedural nature and there is no need to consider climate change impacts, though it is noted that all native plantings will have a positive impact on climate change.

7.3 Ngā Pānga ki te Māori
Implications for Māori

Water is of crucial importance to Māori for a host of reasons. The work described in this report will help to restore the Mauri of the rivers and streams in the Ōhiwa catchment.

7.4 Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori
Community Engagement

The intention of this report is to engage with and obtain feedback from community representatives.

7.5 Te Hāngai ki te Pou Tarāwaho Rautaki
Alignment with Strategic Framework

This report details work towards implementing the actions of the Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy.

7.6 Ngā Pānga ā-Pūtea
Financial Implications

There are no material unbudgeted financial implications and this fits within the allocated budget.

8. Ngā Mahi Whai Ake
Next Steps

The work of BOPRC in supporting landowners to take action to improve water quality in the Ōhiwa catchment will continue.



Pūrongo Ki: Report To:	Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum
Rā Hui: Meeting Date:	26 April 2022
Kaituhi Pūrongo: Report Writer:	Gemma Moleta, Senior Planner (Water Policy)
Kaiwhakamana Pūrongo: Report Authoriser:	Julie Bevan, Policy & Planning Manager
Kaupapa: Purpose:	To outline the Essential Freshwater Policy Programme for 2022, provide an update on a Ōhiwa Harbour long-term vision for freshwater and a brief national update.

Essential Freshwater Policy Programme Update and Visions

Whakarāpopototanga
Executive Summary

This report provides Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum (OHIF):

· an outline of Toi Moana’s Essential Freshwater Policy Programme (EFPP) for 2022 and opportunity to be involved,

· an update on mahi progressing the drafting of an example Ōhiwa Harbour vision since the last hui; and

· an update on national regulatory changes affecting the EFPP.

Ngā tūtohutanga
Recommendations

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Essential Freshwater Policy Programme Update and Visions.

1. He Whakamārama
Background

The Essential Freshwater Policy Programme (EFPP) is Toi Moana’s (Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s) work programme to implement the requirements of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPSFM) as well as review the Regional Natural Resources Plan (RNRP) and freshwater related chapters of the Regional Policy Statement (RPS). The EFPP continues to be implemented according to Toi Moana’s agreed programme plan. Tight timeframes are necessary to achieve notification of changes to the RPS & RNRP by 2024 as required by the legislation.

In summary, 2021 involved a large amount of technical / science investigations and reporting, initial regional policy review, and many meetings with iwi and hapū across the region to find out how they would like to be involved in freshwater management and identify capacity and capability needs. The OHIF hui in August 2021 covered values, BOPRCs online engagement tool Participate, the water quality reporting tool and an initial discussion on long-term visions for freshwater under the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM).

2. Essential Freshwater Policy Programme 2022

The major focuses for 2022 are outlined in the timeline below and will be:

• Developing draft measurable targets, limits and policy options to achieve them;

• Working with iwi and hapū where they would like to be involved in the NPSFM process and supporting their mātauranga Māori input; and

• Early “without prejudice” discussions with key stakeholders, and technical experts as Toi Moana staff develop policy options as well as some initial communication and engagement with the public.

2.1 Issues and Options

Toi Moana’s Strategy and Policy Committee will be meeting in June, August and September 2022, their last meetings prior to local government elections. They will be considering issues and options which will become the focus of engagement in 2023, although these may not be fully formed by the time of the meetings. The topics are likely to be grouped as follows:

Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting	Topic
June 2022	RPS freshwater amendments, RNRP Integrated Management, Beds of Water Bodies, and Wetlands chapters
August 2022	Discharges to Water/Water Quality chapters (region wide chapters and FMUs)
September 2022	Groundwater and Surface Water Quantity chapters (region-wide chapters and FMUs). Communications and Engagement Plan for 2023

Local government elections are being held in October this year, which may result in change of Councillors and also OHIF council member appointments.

OHIF will receive another freshwater policy update at the meeting scheduled in September. This will provide an opportunity to be kept informed of key issues and options relevant to the Ōhiwa Harbour Freshwater Management Unit (FMU) as they are considered by Toi Moana. OHIF may wish to provide advice and recommendations to Toi Moana as it sees fit. OHIF iwi members can facilitate their iwi and/or hapū involvement in the freshwater mahi at any time throughout the programme. Informal discussions can be arranged as a committee, as iwi members of OHIF, independently with your iwi and/or hapū or any combination of the above.

3. Engaging on Long-term Visions for Freshwater

Council is currently undertaking engagements and discussions alongside iwi across the region to help set long term visions for freshwater. This is an opportunity to set ambitious but reasonable goals and timeframes as a part of the long-term vision for freshwater, one that reflects what communities and tangata whenua really want draft freshwater management units (FMU) to be like in the future.

This year iwi organisations were sent letters inviting their involvement in developing draft long term visions for freshwater. Where an iwi’s rohe extended over a number of freshwater management units all relevant example visions were attached. A copy of the attachment sent to iwi with an interest in Ōhiwa Harbour FMU is attached for discussion (refer to Attachment 1). There is an opportunity to have a collective meeting with all iwi at once or staff can individually meet with iwi representatives.

4. Community Engagement

Throughout this year, Toi Moana staff will start to build and provide information for the public, deliver online engagement on visions and outcomes, and aim to develop community interest and readiness to engage on policy options that affect them in 2023.

In April 2022, an online survey will be launched on Participate Bay of Plenty seeking public input to the development of long-term visions and environmental outcomes for freshwater.

Toi Moana staff will continue to be responsive to enquiries from community and iwi organisations.

5. Ngā Kaitohutohu

Ngā Kaitohutohu (Māori Technical Advisory Group) held their first meeting for the year on 22 February to advance discussions on Freshwater Management Units coupled with the implementing Te Mana o te Wai. The group have emphasised the importance of engaging with tangata whenua with interests in the water bodies within their rohe.

6. Changes to national freshwater regulations

Nationally, several changes to regulations will be gazetted this year. Proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standard for Drinking Water (NESDW) have been released for public consultation. These will primarily affect regional councils and include changes relating to:

· how at-risk source water areas are delineated.

· how activities that pose risks to source water are regulated or managed.

· protecting all registered water supplies (which will include any party who supplies drinking water to 1 or more other parties).

Changes will need to be included in the Regional Natural Resources Plan as part of the EFPP to implement the NES-DW. Public consultation on the discussion document closed 6 March 2022 and gazettal is likely in mid-late 2022. The government’s consultation material is available here

https://consult.environment.govt.nz/freshwater/nes-drinking-water/

7. Ngā Whakaarohanga
Considerations

7.1 Ngā Mōrea me Ngā Whakangāwaritanga
Risks and Mitigations

There are no significant risks associated with this update.

7.2 Huringa Āhuarangi
Climate Change

The matters addressed in this report are of a procedural nature and there is no need to consider climate change impacts. Climate change impacts will be considered by Toi Moana as part of implementing the NPSFM and reviewing the RNRP.

7.3 Ngā Pānga ki te Māori
Implications for Māori

The NPSFM sets out requirements to involve tangata whenua in the management of freshwater and Toi Moana is progressing this in accordance with Te Hononga, Regional Council’s Māori engagement approach for implementing the NPSFM.

Te Mana o Te Wai in the NPSFM 2020 represents a significant shift by central government to recognise the importance of tangata whenua involvement in the management of freshwater. Importantly, it signals inclusion of mātauranga Māori in shaping up the policies that will be included in the notified changes to the RPS and RNRP.

7.4 Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori
Community Engagement

CONSULT

Whakauiuia

To obtain input or feedback from affected communities about our analysis, alternatives, and /or proposed decisions.

Community engagement on freshwater visions and outcomes will be primarily online in 2022. See the sections on engagement within the report. In 2023, Toi Moana will engage across the region on policy options and implications.

7.5 Te Hāngai ki te Pou Tarāwaho Rautaki
Alignment with Strategic Framework

NPSFM implementation is a core, non-discretionary Toi Moana function.

7.6 Ngā Pānga ā-Pūtea
Financial Implications

There are no material unbudgeted financial implications and this fits within the allocated budget.

8. Ngā Mahi Whai Ake
Next Steps

Over the next period of time, Toi Moana will:

1. Continue to invite iwi and hapū to discuss a working draft long-term vision for freshwater and environmental outcomes for Ōhiwa Harbour and other FMUs;

2. Seek public feedback via Participate Bay of Plenty (online engagement) on long-term visions and outcomes for Ōhiwa Harbour and other FMUs;

3. Progress technical work towards identifying water quality and ecosystem health targets for all national attributes that would help us to achieve vision and outcomes for freshwater values; and

4. Iwi and hapū continue to be invited and supported to express their values and mātauranga Māori tohu that could be used to indicate the state/wellbeing of these values.

Tuhinga Tautoko
Attachments

Attachment 1 - Discussion document for Ōhiwa Harbour FMU long-term vision ⇩



Pūrongo Ki: Report To:	Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum
Rā Hui: Meeting Date:	26 April 2022
Kaituhi Pūrongo: Report Writer:	Tim Senior, Land Management Officer
Kaiwhakamana Pūrongo: Report Authoriser:	Chris Ingle, General Manager, Integrated Catchments
Kaupapa: Purpose:	To update the members on the work undertaken to give effect to the Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy actions since November 2021 and to seek endorsement of the proposed 2022/23 work programme.

Work Programme report to 31 March 2022 and proposed work programme for 2022/23

Whakarāpopototanga
Executive Summary

This report provides an update of the work carried out under the 2021-22 Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy annual work programme from November 2021 to March 2022. Much of the work is on-going in nature and contributes to a long term vision for the harbour. Further progress has been made in the areas of water quality, freshwater fish and tuna, kaimoana research and support for Upokorehe kaitiaki. The report also includes a proposed work programme for the next financial year, 2022-23, and seeks the endorsement of the Forum for this. Members are also asked to provide guidance on topics for a proposed informal workshop.

Ngā tūtohutanga
Recommendations

That the Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum:

1 Receives the report, Work Programme report to 31 March 2022 and proposed work programme for 2022/23;

2 Endorses the proposed 2022-23 annual work programme.

1. He Whakamārama
Background

The Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy (the Strategy) covers the Ōhiwa Harbour and its land catchment area. It is a non-statutory document that was prepared by the Strategy partners: Whakatāne District Council (WDC), Ōpōtiki District Council (ODC), Ngati Awa, Te Upokorehe, Whakatōhea, Te Waimana Kaaku, and Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC). The Strategy was adopted in 2008 and was refreshed in 2016.

Planning and coordination of the operational work of the Strategy is overseen by the Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy Coordination Group (OHSCG) at which all partners are represented.

The work programme for the coming year is presented to the Forum for endorsement prior to the beginning of the new financial year; while results for the previous year are reported every September. A work programme update is also provided. This report is also presented to the Bay of Plenty Regional Council.

Funding for the delivery of this work comes from the existing budgets of the strategy partners. An extra contribution from BOPRC of $50,000 per year covers the deliverables that are not the direct responsibility of any of the other 6 partners. Landowners and community groups also make a substantial contribution, either in cash or in kind, to many of the actions.

The deliverables of each annual work programme are based on the higher level actions contained in the Strategy. Most of these actions are of an ongoing nature.

2. Progress on key deliverables November 2021 to March 2022

A table briefly detailing the work done against the deliverables in the annual work programme can be found in Appendix 1. Below is a summary of the more significant aspects of that work.

2.1 Actions 1.1 and 1.2, water quality

One further Fonterra Farm Environment Plan has been prepared bringing the total completed in the catchment to 11. There are 20 dairy farms, 19 of which are Fonterra suppliers.

23 properties currently have BOPRC Environmental Programmes in progress. 10.9km of riparian fencing has been completed this financial year with up to a further 75km planned over the next two years, with some of this gaining extra funding from Central Government’s freshwater improvement fund.

2.2 Action 1.5, mangrove management

One working bee was held this year prior to a somewhat controversial High Court ruling which declared mangroves to be natural wetlands and therefore subject to the rules of the National Environment Standard for Freshwater. Work is underway nationally to seek a pragmatic solution to this. Discussions are also under way with BOPRC consents staff about whether a consenting pathway exists at present.

As a result of Upokorehe’s Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act claim, they have recently been granted a PCR (protected customary right) for the removal of mangroves in Ōhiwa. This would supersede both the High Court ruling and the Resource Management Act, but may take some years to come into effect.

2.3 Action 1.9, habitat and species management

Tu O’Brien’s monitoring shows the numbers of black swans in the harbour to be similar to those of last year. Discussions on some research, to assess the extent of the seagrass beds and any impacts of swan grazing on them, are currently underway with the University of Waikato.

Some trial swan shooting is planned for the coming game bird season (May to August).

2.4 Action 1.10, freshwater fish

A desktop survey found there were 554 potential barriers to native migratory fish and tuna passage in the harbour. A BOPRC summer student carried out an assessment of 370 of these. 107 of these are deemed to be in need of remediation.

Some trial eDNA samples have been taken to try to identify which fish are present in which tributaries. More sampling is planned shortly.

Restoration of some whitebait spawning habitat is being planned for an oxbow on the Nukuhou River by the S bends at Cheddar Valley. Approval has been obtained for Hiwarau C who own part of the land involved.

2.5 Action 1.14 and 3.8, bylaws

Further efforts are still underway with ODC to try to resolve the issues with vehicles on the mudflats and Ōhiwa Spit where they are prohibited by the Beach Bylaw.

2.6 Action 2.1 and 2.2, shellfish and fish

The Awhi Mai Awhi Atu project led by Kura Paul-Burke is ongoing. Seastar trapping trials are underway, Tuangi and Pipi bed mapping have been completed (on the western side of the harbour only), work on habitat and decision making are underway and data from sediment cores has been analysed. (See separate agenda report).

For the third year, the BOPRC biosecurity dive team set 240 traps for Asian paddle crabs in February. 8 were caught. Last year 9 were caught.

2.7 Action 3.3, kaitiakitanga and stewardship

25 volunteer kaitiaki regularly patrolled the Whangakopikopiko pipi bed and surrounding areas over the summer and long weekends. Visitor behaviour was considered worse than last year. A number of vehicles were seen on the mudflats (often without registration). There are concerns about congestion, safety and camping at the boat ramp. An interpretive sign on the birds of the sand island has been made as agreed but not yet installed. BOPRC has agreed to fund some of the other resources needed by the kaitiaki through the Care Group programme. An agreement document is being drafted.

DOC have put chain across the entrance to the Tokitoki reserve to keep vehicles and campers out. This has since been cut. DOC are preparing a resource consent application to repair the sea wall.

2.8 Action 3.6, communications and education

Progress has been made in developing the Ōhiwa website over the last year and it’s now at a stage where it’s ready to go live (see separate agenda report).

2.9 Action 3.13, health and safety

The remediation work identified as required in the Kutarere flooding report has now all been completed by BOPRC along the stream, ODC on Wharf Rd. and Higgins on the state highway. A river engineer has also been asked to investigate the capacity of the Kakaho Stream below the Wharf Rd bridge.

Upokorehe are currently applying to the BOPRC Community Led Adaptation Fund to investigate the implications of climate change on the lowlying parts of Kutarere village. BECA will be engaged to carry out this work.

3. Proposed 2022-23 annual work programme

Many of the strategy actions are, by their nature, ongoing. This is reflected in many of the work programme deliverables being repeated each year. However the programme also needs to respond to changing circumstances and needs.

The full proposed work programme for next year can be found in Appendix 2. Some of the more significant pieces of work planned for the year are:

· Continuing the work with landowners in the catchment to reduce the sediment and other contaminant loads entering the harbour.

· Completing the assessment of the Nukuhou River bank erosion and possible solutions to it by a river engineer.

· Complete the fish passage barrier survey, carry out further eDNA surveys and begin the retrofitting of identified barriers.

· In conjunction with Waikato University, carry out an assessment of the health of the seagrass beds.

· Apply for a new resource consent for mangrove management if this is deemed necessary.

· Continue to support the Awhi Mai Awhi Atu kaimoana project.

An indicative budget for next year is as follows:

Item	Cost
Mangrove management	$12,000
Comms support (OHSCG minutes, newsletters, website etc)	$6,000
Fish barrier remediation 100@$200each	$20,000
eDNA sampling kits	$10,000
Total	$48,000

The Forum members are asked to endorse this proposed work programme and to provide guidance on any changes that should be made to it.

4. Workshop/field trip for 2022

The Forum has in the past generally held a workshop during the year. Gemma Moleta has asked for an informal meeting soon to further discuss aspects of freshwater policy in relation to the Ōhiwa catchment. The members are asked whether this is a topic they would like to follow up and if there are any other topics that they would also like to discuss further.

5. Ngā Whakaarohanga
Considerations

5.1 Ngā Mōrea me Ngā Whakangāwaritanga
Risks and Mitigations

There are no significant risks associated with this matter/subject/project/initiative.

5.2 Huringa Āhuarangi
Climate Change

The matters addressed in this report are of a procedural nature and there is no need to consider climate change impacts.

5.3 Ngā Pānga ki te Māori
Implications for Māori

As committed kaitiaki of the harbour and partners to the strategy, the four tangata whenua partners were fully engaged in both the development of the Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy, its refresh in 2016 and its continued implementation. Their mana whenua and mana moana is a cornerstone of the strategy and is the basis of many of the strategy actions. Individual tangata whenua representatives are regularly consulted with regarding many aspects of the work and staff from the councils often attend iwi and hapū hui. In particular, during the last year, the tangata whenua partners have provided support for the mussel restoration project and engaged in the management of mangroves and the development of the heritage trail.

5.4 Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori
Community Engagement

The intention of this report is to engage with and obtain feedback from community representatives.

5.5 Te Hāngai ki te Pou Tarāwaho Rautaki
Alignment with Strategic Framework

This report details work towards implementing the actions of the Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy.

5.6 Ngā Pānga ā-Pūtea
Financial Implications

There are no material unbudgeted financial implications and this fits within the allocated budget.

6. Ngā Mahi Whai Ake
Next Steps

The work programme will continue to implement the actions of the Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy.

Tuhinga Tautoko
Attachments

Attachment 1 - Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy Annual Work Programme results to 31 March 2022 ⇩

Attachment 2 - Proposed Ōhiwa Harbour Strategy annual work programme 2022-23 ⇩

Chairperson
Elected by the Forum at its first meeting each Triennium	Cr Toi Kai Rākau Iti (Bay of Plenty Regional Council)
Deputy Chairperson	Mayor Lyn Riesterer (Ōpōtiki District Council)
Council Members
One representative each from:
Bay of Plenty Regional Council	Cr Bill Clark (Alternate)
Ōpōtiki District Council	Cr Debi Hocart (Alternate)
Whakatāne District Council	Cr Andrew Iles Cr Nāndor Tanczos (Alternate)
Tangata Whenua Members
One Tangata Whenua appointee representative each from:
Whakatōhea	Vacant
Upokorehe	Trevor Ransfield Māui Manuel (Alternate)
Ngāti Awa	Charlie Bluett Tuwhakairiora O’Brien (Alternate)
Ngāi Tuhoe	Hori Hillman Marewa Titoko (Alternate)
Quorum	Four members, consisting of more than half the number of members
Meeting frequency	Six monthly