Submission to The Parliamentary Select Committee for the Environment from The Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum Trust - NZ Parliament
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Submission to
The Parliamentary Select Committee for the
Environment
from
The Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum Trust
10 May 2018
Contact: Chris Twemlow
Email: twemlows@gmail.com
1
Summary of issues
The National Kauri Dieback Programme (NKDP) has been hampered by lack of financial and
people resources. The great bulk of government funding has gone into track upgrades, which
is not a bad thing in itself but which has left other aspects of the response, notably science
and communications/engagement, greatly under-funded. The budget needs to be increased
significantly, particularly in these areas.
The question needs to be revisited as to whether the multi-agency response structure is the
optimum way to deal with this complex challenge. A single standalone organisation to
manage funding and the ongoing management of this disease throughout Kaurilands has
previously been proposed by the NKDP and should be included in the review.
The Programme’s effectiveness in key areas is questionable and there is a real need for
greater transparency, more effective and efficient processes, a greater sense of urgency and
more rigorous accountability.
The Programme has generally failed to meet the strategic goals relating to engaging and
enabling people and communities outlined in its 2014 strategic plan. An in-depth review of
performance and processes to date in the specific areas of communications and engagement
is needed, with new strategies, implemented by appropriately skilled and located staff in a
transparent efficient manner.
There does not appear to be any consistent, coherent relationship building strategy for
proactively building and supporting community networks, or tapping into the knowledge of
volunteer groups. In particular, the lack of support for The Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum
has been appalling.
There has been no over-arching promotional/mass media campaign to communicate
proactively with New Zealanders and with visitors throughout Kaurilands.
There is a need for far more investment in the research programme, including faster
diagnostic testing, work on other species affected by kauri dieback, and the application of
the social sciences.
2
1 Introduction
The Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum (CKDF or the Forum) is a community-based volunteer
organisation dedicated to protecting Coromandel Peninsula kauri. We have been operating since
2014, and became a registered charitable trust in April 2015. Our focus on community engagement,
education, and advocacy complements the work of the National Kauri Dieback Programme (NKDP or
the Programme). We work closely, and enjoy a good relationship with partner agencies in the region.
A backgrounder on the CKDF and its activities is attached as Appendix 1. As can be seen from the
latter, the Forum has made a major contribution, particularly in terms of its public and sector-
specific workshops, work with schools, media and publicity and collaboration with agencies.
This briefing focuses on the engagement and communications functions of the NKDP, as that is our
Forum’s main area of interest, with only limited commentary on other aspects.
Public engagement is critical if the kauri is to have any chance of survival, and it is pointless to
bemoan the lack of compliance at cleaning stations when communications and engagement has, in
our opinion, been inadequate.
The CFDF trackside survey 2016/17 showed good levels of support for kauri dieback management
measures. However, with extensive media coverage focusing on the dire situation in the Waitakere
Ranges, lack of compliance by track users, and criticisms of the National Kauri Dieback Programme, it
would be no surprise if public confidence in the Programme’s effectiveness and belief that kauri can
be saved has waned. Positive action is required to make everyone in Kaurilands willing participants
helping to solve this problem.
2 Discussion of Key Issues & Possible Remedies
i Lack of resources
The National Kauri Dieback Programme has been hampered by lack of financial and people
resources. The great bulk of government funding has gone into track upgrades, which is not a bad
thing in itself but which has left other aspects of the response, notably science and
communications/engagement, greatly under-funded.
For example, the Programme spent just $176, 364 on Engaging & Enabling People in 2015/16,
$155,419 in 2016/17. (This included the funding received from the Tindall and Aotearoa
Foundations.). In comparison, the Didymo Check, Clean, Dry campaign spent $4.55 million on social
marketing alone in the first three years of the response
(www.cbsm.com/cases/the+check+clean+dry+campaign_171).
In addition, we believe the filling of key roles on a part-time basis is not sufficient or conducive to
effective performance in a challenge of this complexity.
Funding therefore needs to be increased significantly, particularly in the areas of communications,
community engagement, and research.
3
ii Programme structure
Whether the multi-agency response structure is the optimum way to deal with this complex
challenge is open to serious question. Partners and agencies have concentrated (understandably) on
their own areas of expertise and statutory obligations, leaving gaps when no organisation or the
Programme structure addresses particular activities (e.g. communications). Time might help build
greater organisational effectiveness but we question whether the current structure or traditional
bureaucracy is capable of delivering what’s needed – and the Waitakere Ranges demonstrate kauri
do not have the luxury of that time!
The 2013 Kauri Dieback Long Term Management Business Case discussed several future delivery
options ranging from the status quo to a strategy/operational delivery split, or a standalone
organisation. The recommendations at that time noted that the currently preferred option for the
delivery of the long term management programme was a standalone organisation, and agreed to
develop a detailed proposal to proceed or not proceed with the establishment of a standalone
organisation to manage delivery of the long term management programme, by June 2015.
The 2014 strategic plan stated “We will effectively manage the Programme by:
Exploring alternative structures
Action: Review the current governance structure and investigate other options that might
better support the efficient and effective operation of the Programme.
Expected benefits include:
• utilising a structure that provides greatest stability over the long term;
• increased confidence by stakeholders that the Programme is fit for purpose;
• timely, consistent and balanced decisions;
• enhanced accountability and governance.”
The Forum is not aware that this proposal has ever been taken further. An obvious downside to any
radical change is that kauri and communities can ill-afford the time lost and upheaval caused during
investigation and transition.
Nevertheless, a well-resourced standalone organisation managing funding and all aspects of the
ongoing management of this disease throughout Kaurilands could offer significant benefits and the
feasibility of such an alternative structure should be investigated in detail.
iii Lack of accountability, transparency and efficiency
The Programme’s effectiveness in key areas such as engagement has been questioned and there
appears to be a real need for greater transparency, more effective and efficient processes and more
rigorous accountability generally. For example, the Annual Report of 2009/10 contains no financials,
and the reports for 2015/16 and 2016/17 only has reference to very general pie charts of revenue
and expenditure. (There is nothing at all on easily accessible public record for the period 2010-2015.)
There is no sharing of proceedings from governance group meetings or discussions.
Looking specifically at community engagement, it is difficult to get an overview of what is going on,
to understand why decisions are made and where the money goes. Requests for proposals are
usually made very late and the Forum has sometimes had less than a week to draft and despatch a
proposal. There is usually a long wait, sometimes months, before we receive a reply, inevitably in the
4
negative. (For example, the Forum is currently still waiting to hear whether a proposal for track
ambassador support, submitted before Christmas and re-submitted in April in a further round, was
successful. Guess not!) At times, we find it hard to comprehend reasons given for declining our
application.
There is no publication of who receives $5000 grants and why, and no sharing of these projects. As
for the three $20,000 grants funded annually by the Aotearoa and Tindall Foundations, The Chinese
Conservation Education Trust and Te Runanga O Te Rarawa have received grants two years running,
Landcare Trust and Te Rununga O Ngati Whatua have received one each. These are all laudable
projects and the Forum is not criticising them in the slightest, but the process does not seem to be
fair or equitable given the Forum is the only NFP operating in the area of kauri dieback anywhere on
the Coromandel.
We believe all processes, systems and KPIs need to be reviewed and thoroughly
overhauled/replaced to deliver greater transparency, greater accountability to the public, and more
efficient, equitable and timely decisionmaking.
iv Strategic goals not achieved
The Programme has generally failed to meet the strategic goals relating to engaging and enabling
people and communities outlined in its 2014 strategic plan. The 2014 Programme strategy document
Kia Toitu He Kauri – Keep Kauri Standing: New Zealand’s strategy for managing kauri dieback disease
identified Engaging and enabling people and communities as a key goal, stating:
“We will engage people and communities by:
Encouraging behaviour change
Action: Implement research-based initiatives that influence behaviour across a range of
audiences.
Expected benefits include:
• increased awareness of the disease and increased enthusiasm for the need to act now;
• increased behaviour change in target audiences that supports the protection of kauri
(e.g. increased use of hygiene measures across all kauri forest users).
Communicating consistently and proactively across the Programme
Action:
• Review our national communications plan covering all target audiences, including
developing channels to share information, achieve continual improvement and establish
best practice across the Programme.
• Develop our forest user database and its flexibility to ensure we are communicating most
effectively with each community of interest.
Expected benefits include:
• clear, effective and consistent communications and messages about kauri dieback and
the Programme at a national level that supports local plans/initiatives;
• targeted communications to specific audiences, prioritised by risk factor, to ensure
uptake of best practices for kauri protection.
5
Building long-term relationships
Action: Develop strategies, tools and mechanisms to support the efficient management of
relationships, including systems that can record and target agency, community and
individual interactions.
Expected benefits include:
• targeted and meaningful engagement with agencies, tāngata whenua, communities and
individuals;
• enable feedback/information to be more easily shared across the Programme;
• feedback used as the basis for continual improvements across all areas of the
Programme;
• communities are increasingly educated and empowered for the protection of kauri;
• relationships are formed and nurtured with other organisations that have an interest in
kauri – this will include contracts, agreements and memoranda of understanding, as
necessary.”
Four years later the Forum does not see that many of these have been accomplished.
v Lack of support for and engagement with community groups
At regional level the Forum enjoys excellent working relationships with Waikato Regional Council,
the Department of Conservation and Thames Coromandel District Council. As a regular attendee at
regional operations meeting we feel truly part of a team where we all have clear roles and
communicate with and support each other. However at national level there does not appear to be
any consistent, coherent relationship building strategy for supporting groups such as ours, let alone
for proactively building and supporting networks in local communities and across Kaurilands, tapping
into the knowledge of volunteer groups or sharing knowledge and experience. Our relationship with
the Programme is probably best summarised as transactional (and the Forum acknowledges it is as
much accountable for this as the Programme).
In particular, the lack of financial support for The Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum has been a
source of demotivation and disillusionment. Most of the funding received by the Forum has been
from general, highly contestable, not dieback-specific, funding sources, namely the Department of
Conservation’s Community Fund, Waikato Regional Council’s Environmental Initiatives Fund, and
Pub Charity. To date the Forum has received just over $200 from the NKDP, in four years of intensive
activity that has earned the respect of our agency partners.
In 2016, with funding due to run out in the coming year, the Forum wrote to the Department of
Conservation, MPI and the Tindall Foundation in October proposing a joint funding model to support
the Forum’s activities. A reply was received on 22 December, turning us down in terms that, to us,
felt patronising and betrayed a lack of understanding of what the Forum was about. Accordingly in
February 2017 we sent a lengthier response. No reply has ever been received.
The Forum has now run out of money and has had no coordinator since December 2016. The Trust
has dwindled to five and although there is still the will to continue, realistically the Forum is only
operating as a shadow of its former self, having undertaken only two short term projects (track
ambassadors and summer promotion), each funded on a one-off basis and capable of management
by one volunteer with limited hours available.
6
We also refer the Committee to the report Transforming community conservation funding in New
Zealand released in the last few days by Predator Free New Zealand, which discusses the pressures
faced by volunteer conservation groups, warning that groups are losing interest and feel taken for
granted. The Forum can certainly identify with that feeling insofar as the NKDP is concerned.
An in-depth review of performance and processes to date in the specific areas of communications
and engagement is needed, with new strategies, implemented by appropriately skilled and located
staff in a transparent, efficient manner. Support for community groups and local initiatives needs to
be placed on a structured, stable footing. To assist with this we also recommend that:
Coordinators be employed in Northland, Auckland and the Coromandel/Waikato to support
local groups
Community groups are given funding stability for, say, 3-5 year work programmes
Regular hui bringing volunteers working in this field together in Auckland be held to
exchange ideas and solutions.
vi Communications activity
There has been no over-arching promotional/mass media campaign to communicate proactively
with New Zealanders and with visitors throughout Kaurilands and the Programme has relied on
distribution of brochures and other printed material, track signage, its website, fleeting appearances
of Kauri Konnect and occasional ad hoc local advertising to get the message out.
We understand the shift in emphasis towards behaviour change. However, there has been so much
negative publicity surrounding kauri dieback - relating to both the disease and its management –
that we believe public buy-in may have been compromised. There is therefore an urgent need to
invest in a campaign across Kaurilands to build public support for kauri, and specifically to build the
understanding that everyone is part of the solution and has a personal part to play, to build
confidence in the effectiveness of management strategies and to build the belief that there is indeed
hope for the future of kauri.
vii Not enough investment in science
There is a need for far more investment in the research programme, including faster diagnostic
testing, work on other species affected by kauri dieback, and the application of the social sciences.
The Forum is particularly concerned at the implications of the work of JM Ryder, a Masters student
at Auckland University, et al, which indicates that the host range of P. agathadicida may not be
restricted solely to kauri and may include species such as tanekaha.
viii Feral pig control
We understand the logistical and public relations challenges involved in attempting the eradication
of feral pigs but feel this is a problem that cannot be ignored. The Programme needs to support
regional councils and the Department of Conservation in setting up culling programmes, targeting
high value uninfected or high risk infected areas, addressing feral pigs in regional pest management
plans, and supporting these strategies with funding.
7
3 Learnings from the CKDF Trackside Survey
The Forum surveyed around 600 track users at five popular Coromandel tracks over the 2016-17
summer holiday period, and observed over 3200 track users’ behaviour at cleaning stations.
Information gathered from this survey led us to the following conclusions which may be useful in
support of this discussion:
1. More account needs to be taken of the mobility of New Zealanders and tourists, with
consistent pan-Kaurilands messaging. Significant numbers of respondents had visited kauri
forests in Northland and Auckland in the past year and it is of great concern that 30.3%
reported having been in at least one infected forest in the past year, and 6.7% had done so
at least monthly.
2. 59% of trackside respondents had heard about kauri dieback before the survey. We feel a far
more comprehensive national/kaurilands-wide awareness campaign is needed, along the
lines of didymo.
3. Cleaning station maintenance is vital – the most common reason given for not using a
cleaning station was because it was damaged or empty.
4. There is a clear need for signage entering and exiting, with clear explanation and directions
(including the magic word STOP!). A significant number of respondents said they didn’t use
cleaning stations either because they didn’t know what the station was for or didn’t know
how to use it.
5. People get the message about cleaning footwear, and that tramping gear, bike tyres and
machinery spread the disease but are less aware of dogs, farm animals and wild animals.
6. Landowners are hungry for information.
7. Investment in track ambassadors is probably one of the single most effective ways of
reaching out to track users and changing their behavior.
8. There are opportunities to fine tune media and information sources. Respondents were
asked where they got their information about kauri dieback from and how useful it was. The
following rated highly:
Agencies (DOC, followed by WRC, TCDC, HDC and the National Kauri Dieback
Programme, also the Forum)
Community newspapers
Social media
Signage and billboards
Tourist attractions
Workshops and peer groups.
(The full survey report is available as a pdf and has been shared with regional agencies.)
8
4 Conclusion
The Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum appreciates the opportunity to present our concerns to this
Committee.
We received good “moral support” from NKDP staff at start-up, and wish to stress we respect them
as individuals.
The Forum would like to continue to be part of the solution to this challenge and therefore our
observations are made in a constructive spirit.
However, there are obviously deficiencies in the way the Programme is funded, structured and
delivered that must be urgently addressed, as it is clear that time is running out for kauri.
5 References
https://www.oag.govt.nz/2013/biosecurity/docs/oag-biosecurity.pdf Ministry for Primary Industries:
Preparing for and responding to biosecurity incursions. Performance audit report, Office of the
Auditor-General. February 2013
http://nzpps.org/journal/69/nzpp_693200.pdf Ryder, J. M., & Burns, B. R. (8/8/2016). What is
the host range of Phytophthora agathidicida in New Zealand. Poster presented at Plant Protection
Society Conference 2016, Palmerston North. New Zealand Plant Protection Vol. 69. Related URL.
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/2292/33855
https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/101718676/tanekaha-affected-by-kauri-dieback-study-
suggests Simon Smith 23 February 2018, Stuff Environment
http://www.cbsm.com/cases/the+check+clean+dry+campaign_171 Wendy Billingsley: The Check,
Clean, Dry Campaign NZMAF
https://www.kauridieback.co.nz/media/1382/kauri-dieback_iqanz-report-final-17oct2013-v12-
pdf.pdf IQANZ Kauri Dieback Programme Independent review of the programme and
recommendations for its next phase October 2013
https://predatorfreenz.org/saving-community-conservation/ Transforming community
conservation funding in New Zealand Dr Marie A Brown (http://j6tf91d0ueo2tdwbl2hqjjle-
wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/PFNZ-Trust-Transforming-Community-
Conservation-Funding-in-NZ-May-2018-compressed.pdf)
https://www.kauridieback.co.nz/media/1393/kauri-diebackstrategy-2014-final-web.pdf Kia Toitu He
Kauri – Keep Kauri Standing: New Zealand’s strategy for managing kauri dieback disease. Ministry
for Primary Industries 2014
9Appendix 1
The Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum
Achievements 2014-2018
1 Background
This report provides an overview of Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum (CKDF) activities since its
inception.
Moves to establish the Coromandel Kauri Dieback Forum (CKDF, Forum) started with an initial
meeting of interested parties in November 2013, following workshops organised by Kauri 2000 and
discussion between concerned groups, agencies and individuals. It was resolved to form a
community-based collective, or forum, focussed on keeping the Coromandel dieback-free.
Because of the Coromandel’s appeal as a holiday destination, the threat to Peninsula kauri was seen
as primarily external, with a high risk of dieback being imported here by tourists and holidaymakers.
Locals felt that, despite the cultural, environmental, social and economic importance of kauri to the
Peninsula, not enough was being done to acknowledge and maintain the disease-free status of the
Coromandel by central government, the Kauri Dieback Management Programme, and its agencies.
As events unfolded, however, the first Forum meeting scheduled after the peak holiday season came
hot on the heels of the March 2014 announcement that kauri dieback disease had been identified in
the Hukarahi Reserve, Mercury Bay. With the subsequent detection of kauri dieback on multiple
sites in the Whangapoua catchment, and (it must be assumed) its likely presence in other
Coromandel locations, strategies to address the internal spread of the disease between Coromandel
forests have become equally important. With agencies focussing on operational aspects of dieback
control, the CKDF is playing an important role in education, advocacy and engaging local
communities in protecting local kauri on the Coromandel Peninsula, working alongside, and
complementing the work of agencies.
3 The Forum Vision
Healthy kauri thriving throughout the Coromandel Peninsula, treasured and nurtured by all.
4 Our Mission
To unite the people of the Coromandel in protecting the kauri of the Coromandel.
5 Forum Structure
The CKDF Trust is an incorporated and registered charitable trust, with a Board of Trustees
responsible for governance and employment of the Forum coordinator. Trustees and other
volunteers make up the Management Group which is responsible for day-to-day direction. Agency
representatives (Department of Conservation, Waikato Regional Council, Thames Coromandel
District Council) have attended Management Group meetings when able and support the Forum
with technical advice.
10With the exception of the coordinator all those involved have been or are unpaid volunteers, from
different parts of the Peninsula and from a wide range of backgrounds and interests, all of whom are
involved in their own businesses as well as other community groups.
The Trust meets monthly and copies of minutes are available.
The area covered by the CKDF focuses on the Coromandel Peninsula, north of a line from Paeroa to
Waihi. However the Forum is very conscious that no physical boundary preventing the spread of
kauri dieback disease exists between the Coromandel and Kaimai Ranges, so where appropriate the
Kaimais are included in Forum activities.
6 Funding
Over the past two years, day-to-day operation and funding of a part-time coordinator has been
funded by Department of Conservation grants totalling $77,000, most through DOC’s Community
Fund. (In the 2014 funding round the CKDF applied for $275,050 over three years from the (then)
Community Conservation Partnerships Fund (now the Community Fund - CF). This included funding
for a full-time coordinator. The project was allocated $57,000 (inc. GST) for year two only -
2015/2016.)
Until this grant was received the Forum operated on $20,000 gifted to the Forum by the
Department. This had enabled a part-time coordinator to be appointed but not a lot more. Because
the CF funding was not sufficient to support both a full-time coordinator and a programme of work
over the year, the Forum made the decision to re-shape the coordinator’s role as a part-time
position and review budgets and timelines accordingly. This led to some compromises in terms of
the work programme but the Forum was nevertheless able to make significant progress towards
meeting most of its KPIs and undertake additional work.
We have received little funding ($220 in fact) from the National Kauri Dieback Programme, as NDP’s
support for community groups appears to be short term and project driven. Having tried, and failed,
to get financial support for specific projects, it seems of little benefit to us to “manufacture” projects
that do not directly help us achieve our priorities purely for the sake of funding.
We received funding from Waikato Regional Council to carry out a survey of attitudes, awareness
and behaviour amongst track users at key Coromandel locations in summer 2016/17. Although this
initiative is a discrete project that sits alongside our day-to-day work it will be a vital tool in
informing our strategies for the future, as well as those of WRC, DOC, TCDC and the NDP.
Grants from Pub Charity have also enabled the Forum to undertake summer media campaigns over
the past three seasons targeting residents, accommodation providers, bach owners and visitors to
the Coromandel over the peak holiday period.
7 Major activities
2014-2015
Management Group established
Constitution produced
Board of trustees established
Incorporated and registered as a charitable trust
11 Received one-off grant of $20,000 from DOC
Successful application to the DOC Community Fund (formerly CCPF) - $57,000 over three
years.
Preparation of strategic plan and annual work plan
Appointed part-time co-ordinator Alison Smith
Achieved improved media publicity for kauri dieback disease
Set up Facebook page
Initiated e-newsletter
Held three community forums in Thames, Coromandel and Whitianga
Dieback banners on all Coromandel Adventures buses thanks to trustee Sarni Hart
Distribution of posters and brochures to key accommodation and tourism providers
Summer advertising campaign thanks to financial assistance from Kauri 2000 Trust
Took on responsibility for the billboard project when the National Programme was
unable to make progress and handed this back to Kauri 2000 who had received the
original Waikato Regional Council grant.
Started establishing local groups
Worked with WRC, DOC and TCDC to build closer relationships, also established
relationships with the national dieback programme and Auckland City.
Started forging links with iwi
Made submissions to the Minister of Conservation re formal closure of the Manaia
Sanctuary, to TCDC regarding development at New Chum Beach and to Hauraki District
Council regarding action by Council to prevent the spread of kauri dieback in the district.
Participated in the Northland Symposium, and also participated in the familiarisation hui
held at Matai Whetu Marae, Thames
Made numerous presentations, including Cubs, radiographers, QE II covenanters, the
entire Mercury Bay Area School middle school, kindergartens and B&B proprietors.
2015-2016
A reasonably ambitious programme of work was set down for the 2015-2016 year. After the broadly-
based public workshops of 2013 and 2014, it was decided to trial targeted events focusing on
tourism and the visitor sectors, education and landowners, as well as exploring opportunities to
work more closely with iwi and schools and pursue the establishment of local groups. The
employment of a part-time coordinator funded by the grant was and remains vital to achieving goals
in these areas.
Appointed Jeanie Allport, formerly Biosecurity Officer - Technical Relations, with
responsibility for kauri dieback disease, with Waikato Regional Council, and also a
member of the National Kauri Dieback Programme’s operations team, as acting
coordinator
Installation of roadside billboards at three ‘gateways’ to the Peninsula and on three
main touring routes
Summer promotion campaign (radio and press advertising, press releases)
Volunteers and coordinator distributed dieback brochures, posters and Forum-produced
compendium inserts to all accommodation providers and bach rentals, and major tourist
attractions and information sites
12 Briefing held for information centre managers
Active volunteers work on specific tasks in such as collateral distribution and cleaning
station maintenance/monitoring in Waihi, Whangamata, Tairua, Mercury Bay,
Coromandel, Waiomu and Thames
Working with DOC, provided foreign language signs for installation at key tracks
Workshops for tourism sector and accommodation providers held in Coromandel and
Whitianga
Workshop held for Whangapoua landowners and users
Planning for trackside survey
Risk assessment matrix produced for landowners
Landowner guide to cleaning footwear produced
Presentations to sea scouts, Mana Manu Trust, Federated Mountain Clubs amongst
others
Managed track ambassador project on behalf of national programme pilot
TCDC Long Term Plan – Successfully submitted on the need to have funding included for
protection of kauri on TCDC reserves. This has resulted in significant upgrading of the
very popular Long Bay Kauri Walk.
TCDC – submission to the New Chum development application on the need to address
the threat of kauri dieback during development and subsequent building and residential
activity.
Lobbied Minister of Conservation for closure of Manaia Sanctuary and re-closure of
Hukarahi
Lobbied Hauraki District Council regarding the need for action by Council to prevent the
spread of kauri dieback in the district.
2016-2017
Held three workshops for accommodation providers and tourism operators August 2016
in Kauaeranga Valley, Coromandel and Whenuakite.
Produced a pdf of hints and ideas for accommodation providers as a guide for the
sector.
Produced scoping document for a “kauri friendly operator accreditation scheme for the
tourism and accommodation sector”.
Established links with regional Enviroschools and presented student-led workshops at
September Children’s Day event (which attracted around 130 students plus teachers and
helpers.
Submitted on an application by Waitaia Forestry Ltd for an easement to create a road
through the Coromandel Forest Park Otama Block.
Initiated and worked with Ngati Maru and Te Rangi Kaihoro, a member of the national
Tangata Whenua Roopu, to hold a hui at Matai Whetu Marae. This attracted 80 people
and included sessions on:
o The importance of kauri to iwi (Te Rangi Kaihoro)
o The ecology of kauri forests (Jeanie Allport, Forum coordinator)
o History of kauri on the Peninsula (Thames historian Russell Skeet)
o Introduction to kauri dieback (Dr Peter Scott, Scion Research)
13o Dieback on the Peninsula (Jeanie Allport, Forum coordinator)
o Matauranga Maori and kauri dieback
o How you can help (Vivienne McLean, CKDF chair)
Developed database of key contacts, volunteers and sector groups, which is used to
promote Forum events and opportunities.
Track survey work continued, with questionnaire close to finalised, educational
component designed, surveyors and support people sourced, surveyor training and
script being developed, a pilot to be held Labour Weekend and field work completed
over Christmas and New Year peak holiday season.
Initiated contact with Titirangi Residents & Ratepayers Association, Chinese
Conservation Education Trust and Te Roroa with a view to sharing experiences and
learnings.
Attended inaugural regional operations meeting
Undertook major strategic review and revised work plan
Submitted a proposal for joint funding to NKDP, Department of Conservation and Tindall
Foundation.
Summer promotion held 2016-17 (funded by Pub Charity). This again included brochure,
compendium insert and poster distribution to tourism and accommodation providers as
well as cinema, radio and press advertising, and a stand at the Keltic Fair (reportedly
NZ’s biggest one-day market, with attendance of over 15,000).
2017-2018
Completed track survey final report
Undertook a summer promotion, including radio, press and cinema advertising, with
funding from Pub Charity.
Employed two track ambassadors at seven key Coromandel tracks over the peak
summer period and holiday weekends, with funding from Waikato Regional Council.
1415
You can also read
