Fresh Start for Fresh Water
Clean-up Fund
Quarterly Report
Covering the period 1 January to 31 March
2015
Project Name: Wainono Restoration Project
Date: 30/04/2015
V
ERSION
:
Draft
Introduction
What is this report for?
This template has been collaboratively developed by the Ministry for the Environment and the
Clean-up Fund project teams with the aim of producing efficient and informative report templates
that work for both the project teams and the Ministry.
This quarterly report gives the opportunity to recipients of the Clean-up Fund to record and
communicate to interested parties, including the Ministry for the Environment, funding partners and
the wider public, the progress made on their project, along with any significant risks, issues and/or
health & safety matters encountered, and stakeholder engagement undertaken.
The report provides the Ministry for the Environment with information on how the delivery phase of
the project is going. The reports are a key source of information for updates to the Minister and the
Ministry’s website on the progress of projects funded through the fresh Start for Fresh Water
Clean-up Fund.
The different sections in this report serve different purposes.
The “Project Overview and key facts” section presents a snapshot of what has been happening in the
project this quarter, and is particularly useful for situations where high-level reporting is required
(e.g., strategy/ governance group meetings, preparing fact sheets for the Minister on the progress of
freshwater projects).
The rest of the report provides a more in depth understanding of the project progress. This is a
useful recording tool for the project team and any other involved parties for assessing what has
been achieved to date and what is ahead, as well as providing robust information whenever the
project comes under scrutiny.
Finally, the Declaration section provides assurance to the Ministry that the regional council
recognises its accountability for the information provided, which may be requested by interested
parties beyond the Ministry.
When your report is complete
Quarterly reports should be submitted by the dates agreed in your funding deed, unless otherwise
discussed with your Clean-up Fund Analyst.
Email the completed report to your Clean-up Fund Analyst.
Alternatively, you can post these to:
Remediation Projects Team –Clean-up Fund
Ministry for the Environment
PO Box 10362
Wellington 6143.
What happens next?
Your Clean-up Fund Analyst will assess the report to ensure that you have met the requirements for
funding as specified in your funding deed. During your Clean-up Fund Analyst’s review of the report,
further information may be requested.
1. Project Overview and key facts
Implementation of the project actions continues as we experience good ground conditions for the earthworks. The drought this year has delayed further planting work but fortunately most of the initial plantings undertaken in the previous quarter have survived. Spending is behind budget and we are unlikely to complete all of the on ground work by the end of June. However funds will be committed in contract to projects by this time. Implementation of contracted works will continue, but the rate of progress will be governed by soil conditions and farming operations as we approach wetter months.
Sediment mitigation works
Work has progressed on several properties including further work on the main stem of the Hook River. Low flows in streams has mean that we are largely working in completely dry stream beds which simplifies operations by not needing temporary diversions in most situations.
We have been required to use a chainsaw felling crew to remove vegetation ahead of the earthworks proceeding to avoid health and safety risks and damage to machinery. This has delayed some work due to contractor availability. As most of the trees to be removed are willows, the felling is particularly hazardous (willows are prone to splitting and springing under tension) and this has meant that only contractors with the appropriate qualifications, equipment and health and safety procedures could be used. Some of the work involved felling from top down requiring tree climbing qualifications and equipment. This has added costs and delays to some of the work.
The availability of suitable rock armouring material has also been an issue. Competition between contractors led to one earthworks operator not being able to source material from our usual supplier who has somewhat of a monopoly on supply in the area. It took some time to find an alternative source that was suitable material and close enough to the site. An alternative has now been found and we will have ongoing supply to avoid this being an issue in the future. The material from the new site is particularly good for some situations as it comes in large slab formations that can be split to suit the job in hand.
While contractors are becoming more familiar with the requirements of the work, the amount of time that needs to be spend on site is still significant. Often additional visits are made as land owners become more aware of the implications of the work as it occurs and request minor changes. The most publicly visible works to date commenced in this quarter and this work has generated a lot of conversation in the community and enquiries to the landowner as to what is going on. This site adjoins the main highway and the nature of the work and the heavy machinery have attracted a lot of interest. The most common comment seems to have been along the lines of “I wish I could get that done on my place mate” which is really positive to hear.
Water quality monitoring
Monitoring has continued throughout the Hook catchment but many of the sites have been dry so samples cannot be taken. Of note is that project staff and members of the public observed mass fish deaths in the lagoon itself where numerous flounder were seen floating on the surface or washed up on the shore. This has been observed before, and is most likely to be due to low oxygen levels in the lagoon being exacerbated by high water temperatures and reduction inflows due to the drought. Shallow water bodies are prone to these occurrences but they are likely to be more frequent and more severe where the water quality is poor as with Wainono. The fish mortality seems to have been a short term event as the observations have not persisted.
Canterbury Mudfish
The protection of a significant new population of Canterbury mudfish is imminent as negotiations with the landowner near completion. This previously undetected population was found in the course of our farm surveys and was prioritised for protection due to the abundance of mudfish found across a range of age classes. As the landowner is converting from deer farming to beef in the near future, fencing costs are much reduced from initial scenarios and should enable the project to be more affordable for the landowner and the project. As the site is in the upper reaches of a stable tributary it has the potential to seed new populations down stream of replenish existing ones.
Farm Environment Plans
The template that has been used for our farm environment plans continues to evolve and has had further changes made to reflect suggestions made by an assessment panel made up of Regional Council specialists and industry representatives. The Hook catchment steering group has also promoted changes that make the template more readable and streamlined. Environment Canterbury Land Management Advisors and project staff continue to work on these plans with individual farmers and the process is being well received.
Engineering Work for the Hook Delta Wetlands
Engineering work has yet to be completed for sediment trap works in the Hook delta wetlands. The surveying work completed last quarter did not provide sufficient elevation data for part of the site and further work is needed. This coupled with the engineer being called to give expert witness evidence for an environment court case will further delay the completion of this work. We are proceeding with preliminary site work but cannot progress the consenting process until engineering work is completed. Community
We have been developing signage and interpretation material in consultation with Waihao Rūnanga, the Waimate District Council, Ministry for Primary Industries and the Department of Conservation. This will pull together not only the physical communication material but also the messages they present. A landscape architect has been engaged to design the structures that will hold the material and these will be built with recycled hardwood timbers from the old Waihao box and Bradshaw’s bridge. Using these materials will visually brand the sites as part of the restoration project and will also provide a useful cultural heritage link with the history of water management around the lagoon. As part of the project we were pursuing the use of phone apps that provide locally triggered content that can be linked to the interpretation media on site however it has been decided not to go further with this until the technology and its potential are better embedded.
2. Milestone Table
Please provide information on the progress of milestones for the past quarter. As per the Annual Plan, please identify:
the milestones scheduled to be progressed this quarter;
the activities or interventions scheduled to be undertaken this quarter towards achieving the milestone and their scheduled completion date;
the activities status and any new forecasted completion date if the activities are on-going/delayed;
the progress (in summary) of the activities scheduled this quarter, including tangible achievements.
Scheduled Milestone
Scheduled Activities
Scheduled
completion
date for
activities
Activities Status:
complete
or
or
on-going/delayed
new completion date
Progress summary on activities
(incl. tangible achievements)
1. Develop and maintain project support and relationships with stakeholders.
Integrate Land Water Regional Planning (LWRP) planning implications. Catchment group establishment and maintenance Re-measure perception survey Ongoing Ongoing June 2015 On track On track Delayed, completion date now June 30 2015.
Our Farm Environment Template has been reviewed and now meets the requirements of the LWRP Sub-regional plan produced and
now published for submissions Catchment steering group
performing well as a conduit for project implementation and planning process information
Perception survey delayed to allow for the result to reflect further work in the last quarter
2. Complete investigations to inform management
decisions.
Complete fish habitat assessment and management planning
Complete fish passage remediation actions December 2014 Nov 2015 Delayed, expect completion June 2015. Delayed. Expect completion December 2015
Field work and data assessment completed. Report has been significantly delayed due to family health issues being experienced by our consultant Leanne O’Brien A number of remediation actions
have been completed in the course of the sediment control activities
Date revised in line planning delays identified. We are undertaking contingency planning with the Working Waters Trust to ensure that this work can be completed post June 30th
4. Survey farms using modified Riparian
Management Classification (RMC) assessment protocol.
Undertake surveys January 2015 Delayed, expect completion March 2015
Desk top and on ground surveys continue. Some work is prioritised by the knock on effect from one property to the next, e.g. improving flow paths on an upstream property will affect the downstream neighbour 5. Undertake sediment
control implementation.
Stock exclusion fencing Riparian planting Stream bank battering Construction of sediment
traps and detention bunds
June 2015 On-going/delayed 4.5 kilometres of stream battering completed this quarter
11 sediment traps completed this quarter
10 detention bunds completed Major gravel removal and bed
modification completed in the main stem of the Hook River
No fencing completed this quarter No planting completed this quarter
3. Evaluation of Significant Risks
Please provide details on significant project risks updated for this quarter and how they are managed. Rate the risk (low, moderate, severe) based on the
probability of the risk occurring and the severity of impact on the project.
A significant risk is an event or a situation that
may occur
and impact on the completion of the project or cause the project to fail.
Risk
Date raised
Consequence
Rating
Strategy to
mitigate
Status
Outcomes/comments
Changes in
landowner
support for
project due to
sub-regional
planning
implications
Dec 2013
Reduced success in
accessing farms and
negotiating funding
agreements and
contributions
Moderate
Improve understanding of
implications
Develop communication
responses
Open
While this is still a potential issue, we
have not experienced any access issues
due to this process. There is tension
and caution present in some
discussions however. As the
sub-regional plan is now published for
submission and its implications will be
made clearer, this risk may still have a
bearing on project outcomes.
Extensive areas
of exposed soil
during project
works
October 2014
Sediment discharge
during rain events
Moderate
Sow in grass as soon as
earthworks completed.
Stagger work across
several months
Open
Grass strike has improved with recent
rain fall and we continue to sow works
as soon practicable after completion. A
new seed mix using plantain and
cocksfoot is being tried as this will
provided faster cover growth in cooler
months. Land owners are expressing
concern about the risk of continuing
works into the traditionally wetter
months. We are aware of this risk and
it may mean that we suspend work in
areas where this risk would have the
greatest consequence.
Reduced dairy
pay-out
prediction
October 2014
More difficult
negotiating
environment for
Moderate
Remain aware of issue
facing landowners and
communicate accordingly
Open
We continue to see reduced pay outs
and predictions for the dairy sector
and this has a knock on to cropping
causing greater
spending caution
agreements and
contributions
and dairy support operations. We have
yet to encounter changes in landowner
intentions or support due to this risk.
4. Evaluation of Significant Issues
Please provide details on significant project issues updated for this quarter and how they are managed. Rate the issue (low, moderate, severe) based on the
severity of impact on the project.
A significant issue is an event or a situation that
has occurred
and could or has impacted on the completion of the project or cause the project to fail.
Issue
Date raised
Consequence
Rating
Strategy to
mitigate
Status
Outcomes/comments
Engineering
work repeatedly
delayed (See
budget
underspend
comments for
further detail)
Implementation
works
significantly
behind budget
schedule,
activities may
30/04/2015
03/04/2015
Not completing
works in the
project
timeframe
Not completing
works in the
project
timeframe
High
High
We have proceeded with site
preparation work that does not need
prior engineering work or consents but
are otherwise unable to mitigate for
this. This work is an integral part of the
project in that it will manage one of the
most significant sediment pathways to
the lagoon.
We will continue to progress work
quickly as possible and as water levels
and soil conditions permit.
Open
Open
To be discussed with MfE.
need to be
suspended if
water levels and
soil conditions
prevent
earthworks.
5. Health and Safety
Do your systems meet requirements of Health & Safety Act?
Yes
No
Please describe any new hazard that is
not covered in your health & safety management plan
and/or serious health and safety issue(e.g. boat capsized and
volunteer nearly drown) that have occurred this quarter; their impact (real or potential); their mitigation, if any; significant amendments to your health
&safety management plan; and any comments you think are relevant.
Hazard/issue identified
Impact
Mitigation
significant amendments to the
health &safety plan
Comments
No new hazards
identified for this
quarter
6. Change Register
Please provide information on significant change requests. What changes occurred to the Annual Plan this quarter? Have they been approved and
implemented? Who were they approved by and when? Was the Ministry for the Environment consulted?
A ‘significant change’ is defined as any change that will result in an aggregate increase or decrease in cost of $50,000 or greater to the relevant project costs
as originally set out in the project work programme or annual plan, or in changes to the key outcomes of the programme.
Description of Change
Reason
Impact
Comment
Approval date
Approved by
MfE consulted
7. Evaluation of Financials
Project Tasks
Total from
Annual
Plan
3rd 1/4
Planned
Target
3rd 1/4
Actual
2nd 1/4
Variance
3rd 1/4
Variance
4th 1/4
Planned
target
4th 1/4
Total
Comment
1. Community integration via
catchment groups and
sub-regional planning
$10,899 $3,132 $3,799 $1,132 ($667) $3,899 $3,232
Slightly over budget. Additional hours required to modify Farm Environment Plan template after panel review
2. Complete investigations to
inform management
decisions
$20,000 $20,000 $3,842 ($2,671) $16,158 $0 $16,158
Fish passage remediation to date has been completed simultaneously with sediment control (pitched culvert repair, scour pool barriers) and costs cannot be meaningfully separated.
Final recommendation report from consultant still pending.
3. Establish baseline
monitoring for indicator
species and habitats
$39,000 $11,000 $11,998 ($96) ($998) $8,000 $7,002 Slightly over budget with additional staff hours used for eel monitoring.
4. Farm surveys to identify
and prioritise actions
$6,000 $2,000 $2,181 $3,888 ($181) $0 $0Slightly over budget, Re-survey of site due to implications of upstream works that change stream capacity affecting downstream property.
5. Sediment control
implementation
$1,116,000 $325,000 $135,875 ($201) $189,125 $401,000 $590,125This output is significantly behind budget.
*See explanatory comments below
Explanatory comments for budget underspend
An accumulation of factors has led to a significant underspend for the main implementation outputs of this project.
Severe drought conditions from November through to April have meant that no riparian planting works have been undertaken since September. While most of the species for planting are quite hardy, the total lack of soil moisture would have meant very high failure rates. Irrigation of the planting sites is not practicable.
Hook delta sediment control ($80,000 phased for 3rd quarter) works have been repeatedly delayed due to consultant availability. We cannot proceed with consents or operations for this work until the engineering work is completed. The consultant chosen for this work is a specialist in the area of river morphology and sediment management and has many years of local experience with this type of work. Despite the delays, for this reason and the fact that the work had commenced, we did not want to change service providers. He is currently involved as an expert witness for ongoing Environment Court hearings and the demands and timing of this are largely out of his control. The preliminary engineering work has been completed and drawings pending, however consent timeframes and river conditions will dictate progress on this work.
Large scale drainage realignment and wetland enhancement work was planned for lake margin areas recently acquired by the Waimate District Council. However the gazettal and title transfer of this land was stalled on a technicality by the previous landowner due to ongoing grievance with the Council, effectively suspending the land parcels in an undetermined legal state. The land was procured as part of a legal settlement when the land owner was prosecuted under the RMA. This has prevented legal access to the site so none of the proposed work site has commenced. This land provides opportunities to treat priority drainage tributaries that cannot otherwise be managed so the option of doing alternative works with the funds proposed for this site has not been pursued. We have been informed that full title transfer has now occurred, so can now begin this work.
Availability of suitable rock armouring material has delayed work at some sites at the head of the south branch of the Hook River. Commercial competition between earthmoving contractors has limited the supply of this material as one operator has control of the main quarries that are within economic transport distance of the project. As some land owners have preferences for the contractors they use, and these operators could not source the material from the usual supplier, there were delays in finding a suitable alternative. Such a supply has now been found and work has progressed at these sites. This issue had not been anticipated as the level of controlling interests in the supply were not known.
In general terms the implementation work is slower to deliver than anticipated. The time that needs to be spent with landowners and contractors on site for work that is underway, prevents the required planning, administration and liaison occurring for the next body of work to be progressed. As works proceed on site, often landowners only then discover implications of the work that needs to be addressed. These have all been relatively minor adjustments to things like fence lines, tree removal and gravel deposition but none the less require a site visit, land owner and contractor
management time.
The implications of farming operations has also caused delays in the surveying and implementation work for some properties. Some of the issue is that the land owners are unavailable to meet to go over proposals, but at other times it has been access limitations due to stock or cropping activities.
