MINUTES OF THE SIXTY-FIFTH MEETING OF THE AUCKLAND CONSERVATION BOARD HELD ON THURSDAY 26 JUNE 2003 AT AUCKLAND CONSERVANCY BOARDROOM COMMENCING AT 9.30 AM.

PRESENT: Paddy Stafford-Bush (Chairperson), Stephen Ching, Mel Galbraith, Laly Haddon, David Hill, Tony Holman (for part), Margaret Kawharu, Alan La Roche, Catherine (Cath) Tizard

IN ATTENDANCE: Rob McCallum (Auckland Conservator); Warwick Murray (Community Relations Manager); Marie Alpe (Community Relations Officer Board Support); Fiona Oliphant (Community Relations Officer Media) for part. Other officers joined the meeting for particular items as indicated in the minutes.

VISITORS: Helen Lindsay, Barry Luckman, Jim Holdaway (Motutapu Restoration Trust/Little Barrier Island (Hauturu) Supporters Trust); Geoff Davidson (NZ Native Forest Restoration Trust NZNFRT); Pita Turei (Ngai Tai ki Tamaki Trust); Christine Fletcher (Motutapu Restoration Trust); Brian Davis (NZNFRT); Judy Hanbury (Little Barrier Island (Hauturu) Supporters Trust/NZNFRT); Alex Sie (Motutapu Restoration Trust); David Pattemore (Regional Officer, Forest and Bird); Jim Dart (NZNFRT); Ken Catt (Waitakere Forest and Bird); Terry Mita; Rex Smith; Eddie Watts (Leigh Fishermans Association); Peter Blackwell, Trish Rea (option4); Scott Macindoe (Option4)

Chinese Conservation Education Trust: Estella Lee (Chair)
Stella Chan (Deputy Chair); Raymond Chan (Treasurer), Eric
Hsiao, Winkie Chau, Kenneth Wang, Song Lam

Laly Haddon offered a karakia.

1. APOLOGIES/WELCOME/INTRODUCTIONS

Paddy advised that the meeting did not currently have a quorum. Apologies were recorded from Denise Yates and Anne Fenn as well as from Cath Tizard and Tony Holman for lateness. Marie advised that NZCA liaison person David Chandler was unable to attend the meeting.

Paddy welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2. PUBLIC FORUM

Christine Fletcher spoke on behalf of the Motutapu Restoration Trust saying that last year when the Trust talked with the Board it had been in transition and faced with a number of challenges. She advised that she now wished to update the Board on progress that had been made acknowledging that this would not have been possible without the support and partnership of other groups in particular the Department 0f Conservation. Christine paid tribute to the Auckland Conservator for giving the Trust time and flexibility to evolve in its own way.

Christine noted that the issue of where the Trust fitted with the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park and with conservation estate was still a challenge but it was hoped that the Trust would become an effective working model. She explained that the Trust had looked at matters such as governance and sub-committee structures, volunteerism, its advocacy role and relationship with the farm, the latter being crucial, for example, to ensure that plantings were secure from stock damage.

Christine talked about access challenges; support from Fullers in terms of discounted fares and the implications of the closure of Home Bay wharf for the planting operation. She put to the Board the issue of priority for remedial work on the Home Bay wharf acknowledging that from the Department' s perspective this might not be high. Christine explained that the Trust had arranged for an engineering report on the Wharf and was keen to work with the Department in terms of various options such as a concession or lease arrangement. Christine reiterated the inter-dependence between the farming operation and t he restoration programme going on to talk about issues such as revenue from the farm going back into the island and a need for creativity with respect to DOC staff roles on the island

Christine invited Pita Turei to speak about 1wi involvement. Pita outlined what was being done in relation to development of a gateway element at the causeway involving pou and information boards, and invited involvement in plans to stay overnight on the island to observe matariki (Maori new year).

Christine then outlined a walkway proposal for the island and how it would profile the restoration programme and historic values of the island. Jim Holdaway spoke about the walkway project noting its potential to augment the public's involvement and enjoyment of the island. Christine and Jim circulated around members a planting plan which showed where specific community and service groups such as Rotary had responsibility for specific areas.

Christine concluded by acknowledging past visions to save the islands of the Gulf and her belief that a way would be found to achieve the Trust's vision. She said the Trust would report regular1y on the Walkway project and asked for consideration to be given to the issues raised regarding Home Bay wharf.

Paddy thanked Christine, Pita and Jim for their presentation commenting that the Board planned to visit the island in November. She added that the Board would keep a watching brief on the key issues raised and seek information from the Department. [Bringup]

Clarification was sought of what was the main entrance point to the island. Both Pita and Christine explained the use of Islington Bay Wharf and that Gardiners Gap was a place to start but might not be the final gateway. In relation to a question about the timeframe for the wharf report, Christine advised that she expected to able to share information with the Board when it visited the island later in the year.

The farm revenue issue was referred to and Christine commented that no formal requests had been made. She added that there were longstanding issues between the Department and the lessee to be addressed but that she was keen to work with the farm more effectively for example in terms of sharing resources such as equipment and boats. Where farming fits with conservation was discussed as a significant issue for New Zealand. David made the point that the principIe of revolving funds, that is the commercial operation supporting the restoration programme should be absolutely supported, but that it might not always be able to work in practice.

Brian Davis of the New Zealand Native Forests Restoration Trust (NZNFRT) introduced himself as Chair and the other trustees present. Geoff Davidson explained that the previous day a presentation had been given to Auckland City Council on the public acquisition of Kaikoura Island with a measure of success in convincing Council of the need to take a leadership role.

Points made by Geoff in relation to a powerpoint presentation inc1uded: the place of the island in the Gulf and its characteristics; potential for vegetation restoration with deer removal; recreational potential; conservation value in relation to fauna such as brown teal and lizards; conservation issues such as the fact that an integrated approach to rat eradication would be needed for the island and Great Barrier.

Geoff referred to the NZNFRT application to the Nature Heritage Fund for a contribution to purchase of the island saying that he was hopeful that this would be successful. He outlined the fundraising strategy inc1uding the plan to lobby all Auckland local authorities for a contribution. Geoff talked about working with Iwi and neighbours and concluded by expressing the view that the project would honour the late Sir Peter Blake's environmental vision.

In response to questions of what in particular the NZNFRT was looking for from the Board, Geoff said that a general letter of support would be useful but the most constructive would be personal or collective influence to spread the word and apply pressure to the Mayor of Auckland City. This was discussed and the point made that the greatest pressure would come from one of the other Councils being the first to contribute funds to purchase of the island. Geoff added that NZNFRT's primary objective of going to Council had been to get them round the table with the Department and ARC and this had been achieved. In response to a question Geoff advised that NZNFRT would be happy to manage the island and had the experience to do it.

Paddy thanked Geoff for the presentation advising that the Board would make time to discuss more formally the matters raised.

Paddy welcomed Margaret, Steven and Cath to the meeting noting that there was now a quorum of members present.

RESOLVED that the apologies recorded at the start of the meeting be accepted.
STAFFORD-BUSH/GALBRAITH

Peter Blackwell explained that his family is one of the original settlers at Great Barrier, his passion for the sea and experience as a boat owner and diver. He went on to say that he had serious concerns about the Great Barrier Island marine reserve proposal. Concerns expressed by Peter included:

• The Department did not understand fish and sea management properly. Experience is important - the Department did not have this and was not talking and listening to those who did.
• Disappointing consultation process. Gained the impression that the Department does not listen and that it takes a high handed approach in relation to community views - that is holds that its view is more important
• Need for more involvement from the community, better and more consultation. Should not think all the answers are around the Board table.
• Not just about enriching the Hauraki Gulf but the ability of the community to use it as well. Need for balance.

When asked about his view on marine reserves, Peter reiterated the need for more public input saying that he was unconvinced of the value of marine reserves given impacts from pollution and algal bloom. Cath pointed out that strong allegations had been made against the Department and asked Peter to be more specific. Peter referred to the discussion document saying that the Department would not provide information on its cost, it came across as glossy propaganda, was misleading and there was no opportunity or funds for the community to produce a counter document

Trish Rea spoke on behalf of option4 formed around the issue of people's right to fish, and tabled a written statement. Trish talked about the importance of the Board understanding how the community is feeling and the increasing antipathy to the concept of marine reserves. She commented on a general lack of understanding of the theory of marine reserves, needs and benefits and talked further on the issue of the lack of decent process citing inadequate information on the budget for the NZUA Tiritiri proposal as an example. Trish displayed a copy of the map from the Auckland CMS approved in 1995 identifying sites for further investigation for marine protection. She used this as an example of where full disclosure of the Department's aspirations was expected but that the map had only come to option4's attention in the last two weeks. She stressed the need for a more strategic approach and what could be achieved if the relevant agencies and groups went down the same path rather than some being alienated.

In response to a request for clarification on misrepresentation, Trish referred to reports of the Department's analysis of support/opposition to the marine reserve proposal among residents of Great Barrier Island.

Scott Macindoe of option4 outlined his concerns with the process for the GBl marine reserve proposal and talked about the need for a strategic approach. He spoke in particular about the Department's refusal to hold public meetings in Auckland and a recent initiative by the Department for drop-in sessions expressing concern at a lack of transparency. Scott requested the Board to take a leadership role and seek urgent clarification of how the public consultation process for the non-statutory phase of the GBT marine reserve proposal is to be completed. Scott concluded by saying that in the absence of a 90 day extension and well planned/promoted public meetings, his view was that the original submission deadline should be adhered to and an analysis of submissions released in a timely fashion.

Eddie Watts, President of the Leigh Fishermen's Association spoke next along with John Walker. A copy of the Association's submission on the GBl marine reserve proposal was tabled. Points made included:

• Concern that the Department in its statistics of % of marine areas protected, and others such as NZUA in its Tiritiri proposal did not take account of the fact that the cable zone is closed to fishing. Points were made that this is of significant size and covers a range of habitats.
• Lack of over-all management plan and concern about the rationale for the marine reserve proposals when fish stocks are managed by mechanisms under the Fisheries Act.
• Concern about safety issues such as boats carrying fish having to travel further and being denied safe anchorage if a marine reserve is created off the north-east coast of Barrier
• Loss of livelihood, increased space competition and the issue of compensation.

Discussion followed on whether there was a flow-on benefit for fishing from marine reserves and the level of support and respect for the Cape Rodney to Okakari Point (Goat Island) Marine Reserve.

David asked if he could some make some observations in relation to what had been said in Public Forum. These were:

• Recreational or commercial fishermen have always pushed forward their concerns but it is acknowledged that the groups had been transparent in respect of the outcomes they were looking for.
• There did appear to be genuine concern about marine reserve processes in Auckland. This needed to be addressed or it would lead to acrimony and potential litigation further on in the process, for example in respect of the submission analysis.
• There was a need for genuine discourse around the Department's aspirations for marine protection but that there was still likely to be disagreement over fundamentals such as livelihood. Noted that the Board was not empowered in fisheries matters and could not for example recommend compensatory mechanisms.
• Agrees that GBI consultation should draw to a close and look at where to next and at a strategic exercise in parallel.

Scott responded in relation to not being able to agree on fundamentals saying that he disputed this. He referred to the very strong public concern and interest in devising plans that would conserve fish, support for voluntary regulations such as reduced bag limits but that this was being undermined by quota management decisions under the Fisheries Act.

Rex Smith expressed concern about the adequacy of studies for marine reserves and the need to look at effects such as run-off and reiterated the need to recognise existing no fishing zones. He criticised the submission forms for categorising people rather than the ability to express a concern as a New Zealander.

Paddy thanked all the speakers and invited them to join the Board for morning tea.

7. MAJOR ITEMS

7.1 Four Wheel Drive Forum [report appended]

Rolien Elliot (Warkworth Area Manager) explained that Don Stewart the Department's representative on the Vehicles on Beaches Working Group was unable to attend the meeting. In response to a question Rolien confirmed that this group was separate from the inter-agency group looking at South Kaipara issues.

Points made in discussion included:

• Interesting survey results
• CMS policies provided some parameters for the Board.
• Value of trying to get information through the next survey of the extent of awareness of conservation values and their attitudes. This would be helpful for designing education programmes. It would be useful to couch questions so that information was gathered in relation to both real and perceived values. For example whether a distinction between driving along the beach below mean high water or above was made and whether the values of each zone were understood
• Value of obtaining a cross correlation between the type of vehicle, distance travelled up the beach and whether they were members of a four wheel drive club.
• Installing speed signs on the beaches would be something to consider.

The set of questions on page 2 of the agenda report relating to South Kaipara and Papakanui were endorsed as following on from the general points made above.

Other points were: while the existing survey provided good information and showed that people were prepared to participate, a more sophisticated approach would enable data to be used for planning purposes and interconservancy policy development; repeat the surveys at different times of the year.

RESOLVED that
1. the report be received with thanks to staff for preparing it
2. the Board recognises the importance of the surveys being carried out by the Four Wheel Drive Working Group and recommends the implementation of a more robust survey;
3. the site specific survey questions suggested in the agenda report and those proposed in discussion be endorsed.
STAFFORD-BUSH/LA ROCHE

8.1 Resource Consent Applications by the Department - Leigh Toilet Upgrade [report appended]

David pointed out that the "Previous Action" section of the report was not strictly correct as the report had not been signed off as approved until 2002 because of matters relating to the reserve boundary.

Matters discussed:

• Provision for changing rooms particularly near the beach. Rolien advised that the future of the existing toilets would be reviewed once the new block was operational.
• Concern at departing from the Conservation Management Plan which provided for toilets at both sites.
• Clarification was s ought o n differences between the concept plan in the CMP and the scheme plan, as well as on the design of the toilet and soakage field. Rolien provided additional detail on the system and consultation with Iwi and neighbours. David expressed caution based on his experience of similar systems.
• The suggestion was made to put signage on the existing toilet explaining that it was a sealed vault system with no risk of pollution of the stream, noting the educational benefit of this.

In considering what the Board's recommendations might be, retaining the existing toilet block for changing rooms and extending facilities generally were discussed. The comment was also made that the Board needed to see a more detailed design in relation to the proposal to ensure that it fitted with the management plan.

RESOLVED that
1. the report be received.
2. the Board support the toilet proposal subject to the provision of additional design information and that this be delegated to the Concessions Subcommittee as necessary to meet timelines.
STAFFORD-BUSH/LA ROCHE

6.2 Chair’s Report

Annie Wheeler Community Relations Supervisor joined the meeting for this item and provided an update on Conservation with Communities Strategy. She explained that a bid by the Conservancy for Head Office funds available for "hothouse projects" to trial implementation of the strategy had been successful. Annie said that the first step was working with staff in terms of the culture shift required and that a survey about what they were already doing, and a staff forum were planned in the near future. Annie advised that she had had a preliminary discussion with Paddy and Alan on the holding of community forums. Annie suggested a fuller discussion at the August meeting when the initial report feedback from the process with staff would be available and tabled information on the Conservancy hothouse project. [Action]

Margaret expressed concern that a pot of money had been provided for this strategy but there did not seem to be comparable resourcing of the implementation of Nga Akiakitanga.

RESOLVED that that the Board request a parallel process of implementation be put in place for Nga Akiakitanga [Kaupapa Maori Strategic Policy].
KA WHARU/HADDON

Paddy welcomed the Chinese Conservation Education Trust
[CCET] Linda Bercusson (Community Relations Officer) and Christina Chau (CCET secretary/Community Relations Officer) joined the meeting for this item. Alan congratulated Estella and the Trustees on receiving the Ministry for the Environment Green Ribbon Award and also an environmental award from Auckland Regional Council.

At the invitation of Paddy, Estella and the trustees introduced themselves. Mel Galbraith and Steven Ching introduced themselves as the Board members who had been appointed to keep in touch with the CCET and provide support as needed. Other Board members echoed Alan's congratulations and appreciation of the work of the Trust. Estella thanked the Department for helping the Trust to set up and also Linda for her support and work. Estella outlined what CCET had achieved in terms of membership numbers, a newsletter, website, a column in a weekly Chinese newspaper, her radio programme where she talked about conservation and the keen interest of Chinese in activities arranged by CCET. The Trust members and staff joined the Board for lunch.

3. REVIEW AND CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

4.1 Minutes of the meeting of 14 May 2003

Matters raised in a review of the minutes included:

• Inaccuracies in relation to the Watercare Services presentation. The following changes were agreed to: Page 1 amend "constructed about 20 years ago" to "built between early 1900's and 1971"
• Page 2 amend "the downside of this approach being that this may result in a need for additional water supply options for the region" to "the downside of this approach being that this may result in a need to ensure any shortfall can be made up elsewhere in the network".
• Letters written as a result of Board resolutions should be circulated to members with the agenda for the next meeting. Action
• Page 11 correction - change "Kia" to "Kai"
• Marie read to the meeting comments from Denise with respect to the Land Access Committee and the issue of potential pressure for access to private land where this was included in a Heritage Area.

RESOLVED that the minutes be confirmed as amended.
STAFFORD-BUSH/HILL

6. REPORTS

6.1 Auckland Conservator's Report [report appended]

Matters raised in relation to this included:

• Damage to mistletoe by roading contractors and the response from Franklin District Council. It was noted that the Department was pursing this as it was not satisfied with the situation.
  
• Updates on marine reserve proposals. This and matters raised in the Public Forum session were discussed at length as to where to with the process for the GBI proposal and in particular how to address misinformation. Options explored were producing a "frequently answered questions" fact sheet, writing lead articles for the Herald or magazines, whether to leave until the submissions analysis was available, not being defensive but put out the problem and invite solutions. What the role of the Board might have in relation to the submission process and generally was also discussed. Points were made about needing to be clear about the target audience and not discrediting the Board as it had to be seen to be independent of the Department and to listen.

Discussion concluded with general agreement that it would be appropriate for the Board to reflect in some way on the issues that had been brought to its meeting with a view to correcting misinformation and achieving a greater understanding about marine reserves, and that the Marine Sub-committee explore this further on the receipt of information in relation to common misconceptions from the Department. Action

RESOLVED that the report be received.
STAFFORD-BUSH/HOLMAN

Major Items ctd

7.2 CMS Related Matters

Marie reported that the Lake Ototoa CMS Implementation report would be available shortly.

RESOLVED that the CMS Implementation report for the Mokohinau Islands, the CMS Implementation Performance Indicators report and the Lake Ototoa CMS Implementation report when completed be referred to the CMS Sub-committee for report back to the August meeting of the Board.
STAFFORD-BUSH/TIZARD

Membership of the CMS Sub-committee was confirmed to be Stafford-Bush, La Roche, Hill, Galbraith, Yates. . Margaret agreed to provide advice on Treaty/section 4 of the Conservation Act matters if required.

Margaret tabled a summary of the findings in the Marlborough Sounds appeal for the Board's information.

7.3 Board Business

Marie explained that information on conservation issues at Awhitu was included in the agenda but that the recommendation was that visits to some other sites were a higher priority in the next year. She suggested that the Board review visiting Awhitu in the following year and in the meantime ask for updates from the Conservator on progress with issues and the Department's relationship with Ngati te Ata.

RESOLVED that the meeting and inspection programme for 2003/4 be adopted.
GALBRAITH/HOLMAN

Annual Report Preparation - Paddy commented that member contributions to this would be highly desirable and particularly invited David to do so. She added that a first draft would be circulated by mid-July.

7.4 Consultation on Roading Proposals – SH20 Avondale Extension and Eastern Motorway Proposal

Paddy noted that she was to lead a discussion on bottom lines but that this was premature as meetings needed to take place with the consultants for both projects. The point was made that it would be useful for the Board to get together with environmental groups with a view to developing a common view as a lobby position. Alan stressed the need for the Board to have a view on key issues such as Purewa Creek and commented that good material was coming out of the focus meetings that he had attended on the Eastern Motorway proposal.

RESOLVED that discussion on bottom lines for both proposals be deferred to the August meeting and that the Marine and Planning Sub-committees meet with the consultants of both proposals.
STAFFORD-BUSH/HOLMAN

9. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS

Marine
Marine Submissions on Greater Marine Protection for Auckland's Wild West Coast and Great Barrier Island Marine Reserve Proposal [report appended] Warwick explained plans for drop-in sessions on the GBI marine reserve proposal. Paddy asked for comment in relation to the discussion points in the report. It was noted in respect of the GBI proposal that the first bullet point should be re-worded to be in support of the concept of a marine reserve in this area. The suggestion was also made with respect to the discussion points for the Auckland West Coast Marine Park proposal that prominence be given to the last two bullet points.

RESOLVED that the Board agree to make submissions on the two marine protection proposals based on the points in the agenda report as amended in discussion.
STAFFORD-BUSH/LA ROCHE

Maori Members
There was no additional comment to the material tabled.

8. STATUTORY ACTIONS

8.2 Concession Schedules [appended]

Paddy advised that she had expressed some concern to the Department that in view of partnership with community groups the Board had not been consulted regarding the Motuihe Trust shade house application. Warwick explained that although it was the intention to involve the Board, urgency had prevented it in this case and noting it was a temporary structure.

Marie advised that she had been contacted by John Craig re meeting with a sub-committee of the Board about the Motuihe restoration plan. She advised that if members agreed she would set up the meeting. A request was made for information to be circulated in advance of the meeting. It was agreed to involve the Concessions Sub-committee plus Mel Galbraith. Action

RESOLVED that the schedules be received.
STAFFORD-BUSH/LA ROCHE

Rob reported in relation to the Hauturu kiore resource consent application that the Department had appealed the decision on the grounds that it was unlawful and had also appealed the cost. He advised that a meeting was being held with Ngatiwai iwi - Ngatiwai, Ngati Rehua and Manuhiri.

Rob went on to flag that applications were understood to be pending from both the Outdoor Pursuits Centre [presentation to the Board August 2002] and a new group called the Kawau Island Maritime Park Conservation Trust for concessions Sunny Bay, Kawau Island.

At this point there was no longer - a quorum of members present.

10. MINUTES – NEW ZEALAND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY AND NEIGHBOURING CONSERVATION BOARDS

Northland minutes for meeting of 9 May 2003 were included in the agenda and Waikato minutes for April and June tabled. Alan provided an update on the Te Kouma regional park proposal.

11. LIAISON/REPRESENTATION

Alan reported on his attendance at the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement review workshop noting that it had been dominated by the issue of mangroves with polarised views on their value or not. He commented that seagrass and siltation was also an issue discussed. He suggested keeping a watching brief. The Board providing a response to the review at this stage was discussed and it was agreed to leave until a draft document was available.

12. CORRESPONDENCE [schedules appended]

There was no discussion.

14. DATE AND VENUE FOR THE NEXT ORDINARY MEETING

Thursday, 28 August 2003 in the Conservancy office

The meeting closed at 3.05pm.