BACKGROUND
Whangamata is a small holiday town that has benefited greatly from its world famous surf break, The Whangamata Bar.
Surfers come from America, Australia, South Africa and Europe to ride its waves and legendary Hawaiian Pipeline master Gerry Lopez labelled it “A jewel of the South Pacific”. The tourism related socio-economic impact on the town of Whangamata from this significant landscape feature cannot be overstated.
Surfers monitoring the sand bar have discovered a correlation between the deterioration of the waves and the periodic dredging of the access channel bought about by the opening of the Whangamata Marina in 2009.
The previous Environment Minister, David Benson-Pope, approved consents for the marina with the condition that the Whangamata Bar be monitored for any adverse effects.
He assured the Surfbreak Protection Society (SPS) in writing that the Waikato Regional Council (WRC) and consent holder The Whangamata Marina Society were obligated to:
- retain appropriately qualified and experienced persons to develop a plan to monitor the sand bar at the harbour entrance
- determine if the dredging and construction had any long term effects on The Bar
- cover the costs of The Bar monitoring program
In 2007, before construction of the marina began, SPS met with the WRC to discuss and help shape the methodology of The Bar monitoring program.
SPS recommended the monitoring include the concepts of surfing science, of which the key parameters are peel angle which dictates ride speed and length, and vortex ratio which dictates wave breaking intensity.”
The WRC and The Whangamata Marina Society refused to incorporate surfing science and chose to rely on sporadic Bathymetric Surveys, which only measure the depth of water bodies from the water surface.
The data these surveys generate:
- has nothing to do with measuring wave quality
- is not coordinated to take place before and after dredging activities
- provides inconclusive results about the impact of dredging on The Bar
Post 2009 surfers noticed the waves breaking on The Bar had undergone a significant loss of form. SPS approached the WRC and The Marina Society and shared the surfers concerns with them.
Both organisations rejected the anecdotal evidence SPS presented and they refused to upgrade the bar monitoring program to establish the real impact of dredging.
The WRC argued that they and The Whangamata Marina Society were only required to monitor the volume, and not the shape of The Bar or the amenity value of the waves it provides.
This contravened the Crown’s Marina consent conditions as the “environment” has a statutory meaning under section 2 of the Resource Management Act, which includes “amenity values" and defines them as:
"Those natural or physical qualities and characteristics of an area that contribute to people's appreciation of its pleasantness, aesthetic coherence, and cultural and recreational attributes”
In addition the original consents underwent major change after the concept was presented to the Environment Court and granted approval by the previous Minister.
The WRC approved new Marina “design dimensions” without having them assessed by the Environment Court or opening them up for consultation by the public or concerned stakeholders.
They also gave (non-notified) consent to the marina company to increase dredging amounts from the 3,000m - 6000m per annum maximum originally granted to the 10,000m per annum currently allowed.
On top of this they accepted reports from environmental and engineering consultants Tonkin and Taylor that say the bar suffered negligible damage from dredging, despite these reports being peer reviewed by Willem De Lange, Senior lecturer in Earth and Ocean sciences who states “as far as I can tell from your results, at the harbour entrance it will not be possible to distinguish any impacts from the marina.”
HOW INEFFECTIVE MONITORING HAS SERVED THE AGENDA OF THE WRC AND THE WHANGAMATA MARINA SOCIETY
The failure in the current monitoring regime means it is impossible to demonstrate with scientific certainty that dredging is having a detrimental impact on the bar and surrounding eco-system.
The following statement made on public radio by Mick Kelley, former President of the Whangamata Marine Society, puts this into perspective:
"If all of a sudden someone says the bar is worse than it used to be, it must be the marina, well, how the hell would anybody know? Certainly we'd be prepared if any effects could be proven to be due to the marina, we'd be prepared to do anything within our power to fix that. I do need a qualification to be put in though, provided it can be shown it is due to the marina, then yes, we will do anything in our power to correct it"
The rudimentary monitoring program allows the WRC and Whangamata Marina Society to disregard consent conditions and ignore the real impact of the dredging, precisely because the data it produces is inconclusive.
As long as the monitoring program remains this way they can continue to undermine the anecdotal evidence the surfing community present to them.
SPS REQUST AN OFFICIAL CONSENT REVIEW
In March 2012 at a meeting arranged by SPS, the WRC acknowledged The Bar appeared to be broken, but said they were uncertain whether a natural event or channel dredging was the cause.
SPS referred the WRC to a condition of the Non Notified Maintenance Dredging Consent that gave them power to revaluate the consent if any adverse affects on the environment were detected.
SPS requested an official review of the consents by the WRC. The WRC declined.
SPS felt the WRC were not taking their obligations seriously so they submitted a detailed report of their concerns to the Hauraki Gulf Forum, titled Whangamata Bar Report
The Hauraki Gulf Forum is a statutory body, which promotes the protection and enhancement of the Hauraki Gulf.
Their guidelines set out "the need to identify natural and physical resources of recreational importance, and methods to protect them, including surf breaks, from activities such as dredging"
The WRC are forum members and signatories to these guidelines.
The report was also given to the Environmental Defense Society (EDS), an organisation comprised of lawyers expert in the Resource Management Act who offer legal support on environmental issues.
After reading the report, EDS outlined in a memorandum a number of legal remedies that were available to SPS.
In July 2012 SPS wrote a letter, with the memorandum attached, and extended an offer to WRC to attend a “without prejudice” workshop hosted by EDS, so a common understanding of the physical processes impacting The Bar could be established.
Two months later the WRC sent a letter to SPS notifying them the council had decided to conduct an internal review instead and stating: ”if you wish to provide further scientific information which may assist the review process, please do so.”
On the 27th of September 2012 the Chair of the Hauraki Gulf Forum John Tregidga sent a letter to The CEO of Waikato Regional Council Bob Laing stating "the deterioration of the Bar is of concern to the Forum" and noted "the review of the consents and the offer by the Environmental Defence Society to host a workshop were welcome developments"
WRC CEO, Bob Laing
In a letter dated the 10 of October 2012, WRC CEO Bob Laing replied to John Tregidga and said "the aim of the review is to establish whether the marina dredging activities are the driving forces for the changes at the Whangamata surfbreak. We are currently seeking information from suitable professional’s to determine whether the marina dredging activities significantly influence the changes occurring at the Whangamata Bar.”
Concerned that an internal review would give the council too much discretion over the terms of the review, and adjudication over the results, SPS wrote a letter to the WRC formally requesting assistance to fund a 3D wave modelling camera and stating: "While the Surfbreak Protection Society (SPS) welcome this review, we must point out that a review would be rendered ineffective, unless the review included Surf science to monitor the Bar, as surfing was the reason for initiating the Whangamata Bar Report"
On Tuesday the 30th of October 2012 SPS received an email from Christin Atchinson, WRC Senior Resource Officer at the Coastal Resource User Group who declined to fund the proposed 3D wave modelling program. It stated:
“I have enquired with the Resource Information Group of WRC regarding your request for funding a Coast-Cam for the Whangamata Bar as part of environmental monitoring. Unfortunately there is currently no budget allocated for funding your camera monitoring system. You may wish to request funding for this as part of our annual planning process.”
In essence the WRC refused to honour the terms of the consent conditions, or to enforce them with The Whangamata Marina Society, and instead placed responsibility for associated costs of an upgraded monitoring program on town ratepayers.
Paul Shanks, President of SPS
On the 9th of November 2012 SPS wrote a letter to WRC CEO Bob Laing documenting their concerns with the review process and stating: "Would you agree to an open and transparent meeting without prejudice, with representatives of your organisation, the Marina Society’s, EDS and our own, as soon as is practicable to discuss our concerns?"
Three months later SPS have still not received a response to their letter.
The WRC maintain they are taking SPS's report and concerns seriously but in a recent NZ Herald article, Whangamata Marina Society manager John Gillooly says the report submitted by SPS is "loaded with factual inaccuracies and innuendo producing no new scientific information".
The same article says Council spokesman Brent Sinclair backed the Marina Society, which had shown a "high level" of compliance with the consent conditions.
This contradicts evidence from the 2012 consent review which exposed breaches of both the consent and the Regional Coastal Plan by the Whangamata Marina Society. Something acknowledged in writing by the WRC to SPS.
WHAT SPS HAVE ASKED THE WRC AND THE MARINA SOCIETY TO DO:
- implement full scientific monitoring of the bar, consistent with best national and international practices, so a complete and accurate assessment of the impact of dredging can be established.
- to that end, to install a camera system overlooking the bar, with the ability to 3D model breaking waves - cost $10,000
- correlate data captured by the camera with dredging events - cost $1600 per month
- to make the results of the analysis available to the public
The proposed 3D modelling program has been validated by Dr Jim Dahm, previously engaged by the Marina society, Dr Terry Hume, an expert in sand and beach processes at NIWA, and Dr Vernon Pickett of WRC who had previously worked alongside eCoast.
All three have stated the need for a Bar camera monitoring system at Whangamata.
The Bathymetric Surveys the WRC are currently conducting are more expensive than the cost of installing and monitoring the 3D wave modelling camera, therefore it makes economic sense to do this.
SPS FEEL THE WRC AND THE WHANGAMATA MARINA SOCIETY ARE OBLIGATED TO DO THIS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. They have not fulfilled the Marina consent conditions set out by the Crown.
Whangamata Marina Consent Conditions
2. The Whangamata Bar has been officially recognised as one of New Zealand’s leading surf spots and is now protected under the revised New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement.
3. The WRC are in breach of their responsibilities under the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement and as members of the The Hauraki Gulf Forum.
4. The WRC and The Whangamata Marina Society have a legal and ethical obligation to all New Zealanders to upgrade The Bar monitoring program and meet the Marina consent conditions.
SUMMARY
The WRC have maintained the stance that they are not responsible for monitoring "the quality of waves on the bar" In addition they have used their official channels to keep SPS at arms length, taking weeks and often months to respond to letters, setting up and then failing to confirm meetings, and on several occasions not returning phone calls.
As recently as January 2013 Ross Stewart, President of the Marina Society stated:
Ross Stewart, President, Whangamata Marina Society
"I would say there's about three surfers in this town who will not put it to rest"
"My feeling is they're philosophically opposed to the marina and they think it's just rich pricks here"
It's an important asset for the town, no question about that. But sure as hell what we're doing isn't affecting it."
If this is true then why are the WRC and the Marina Society blocking the proposed monitoring initiative?
This issue is not only about wave quality for surfers, it's also about:
- the Marina Societies refusal to honour the Crowns Marina consent conditions
- WRC's refusal to hold them to account and act in the best interests of all New Zealanders
- the protection of a significant national treasure
WHAT THE WHANGAMATA BAR ASSOCIATION ARE ASKING FOR
A collaborative, scientific monitoring program that establishes conclusively the real impact of dredging on the Whangamata Bar.
Along with SPS we are seeking to work in partnership with both the WRC and the Marina Society to establish the facts required to get past the competing claims and counter-claims.
WHAT YOU CAN DO TO SUPPORT
We believe this issue impacts anyone concerned with protecting our national treasures and as such we want to gather support from as many New Zealanders as possible.
Please support our campaign by joining One Big Voice, linking your Facebook and Twitter accounts, then taking the following action:
1. Click the sign button in the petition summary panel above. This action will show up in your Facebook timeline and provide a link back to our petition page that all your contacts will see. This will help spread the message, build awareness and gather supporters.
2. Share the petition with as many friends, family and colleagues that you feel will support this initiative. If we gather a large enough number of people to publicly call for the WRC to implement these changes we hope it will encourage them to take action.
3. Share our campaign on One Big Voice with any friends, family and colleagues that you feel will support this initiative. It can be accessed in the petition summary panel above.
We believe this issue impacts anyone concerned with protecting our national treasures and as such we want to gather support from as many New Zealanders as possible.
