for a type 2 spill tOC_2 4 _Toc266280510 5.5 Procedures for a type 3 spill tOC_2 5 _Toc266280511 5.6 Debriefing tOC_1 5 _Toc266280512 6. Points to consider tOC_1 5 _Toc266280513 7. Document review tOC_1 6 _Toc266280514 Appendix I Map of site tOC_1 7 _Toc266280515 Appendix II List of equipment tOC_1 8 _Toc266280516 Appendix III Taranaki Regional Council spill trailer tOC_1 9 _Toc266280517 Appendix IV List of
Table 9 Summary of Company performance in respect of Consent 7884-1.1 2016-2017 22 Table 10 Evaluation of environmental performance over time 24 List of figures Figure 1 Wellington Landfarm with associated monitoring locations 7 Figure 2 Company provided landfarm application area map Wellington Landfarm 14 Figure 3 Long terms TDS concentrations GND2284, 2285 and drainage pipe GND2364 19 List of photos Photo 1 An example of a landfarmed area Wellington landfarm 2013 6
marine features and benthic sampling locations have been shown in Figure 1. To better achieve this part of Objective A, a more comprehensive habitat mapping investigation is suggested. page 2 This document may only be reproduced with permission from Cawthron Institute. Part reproduction or alteration of the document is prohibited. 1. OUTSTANDING SUBSTRATES / BENTHIC HABITATS The Taranaki Regional Council has already defined a list of 66 sites as ‘sensitive’
responses 1 Clause 6 – Floodways Amend Decline The submitter opposes clause 6.1. The submitter has a number of services located over and under floodways, which do not affect the ability of the floodway to function. In some situations, services are placed on road bridges (e.g. the North Street Bridge crossing the Waitara River - Map 2c) which would require an authority under clause 6.1(d). The submitter seeks the following amendment: 6.1 No person, except Network Utility
performance for consent 6621-1 58 List of figures Figure 1 Aerial location map of sampling sites in relation to Kaponga WWTP 11 Figure 2 Biomonitoring sites in the Kaupokonui River in relation to the Kaponga WWTP discharge with taxa number, MCI scores and SQMCI scores for each site 15 Figure 3 Aerial location map of sampling sites in relation to Manaia WWTP 21 Figure 4 Map showing sampling sites in relation to Patea WWTP 36 Figure 5 E. coli numbers for lower Patea River at the
of 13 Key Native Ecosystems monitored improving or maintaining condition. page engagement to progress Mt Messenger and Awakino Tunnel bypass projects Improving lifestyles Regional Council Taranaki Connecting people Range of resource investigations and applied research projects undertaken. Supporting community initiatives worked with Wild for Taranaki, iwi and grassroots community groups to improve Taranaki’s biodiversity. Building
calculated by comparing the two sets of aerial photographs for the Taranaki ring plain taken in 2001 and 2007. The results indicated a much higher rate of small stream modification than that indicated by records of consent applications, an estimated 96 km of small stream modifications (including some consented works) during this six year period alone were mapped (an increase of 15% compared to all modification conducted prior to 2001). Comparison of the mapped data with the consents database
a geotechnical specialist. Further detail on design and construction of dairy effluent ponds, including testing requirements is available in IPENZ Practice Note 21. page 6 Dairy Effluent Pond Guidelines T&T Ref. 85537 Taranaki Regional Council June 2013 7 Taranaki soils The following map (Figure 1) shows the geological terrain zones for the Taranaki Region. Table 1 provides a description of each zone and indicative permeabilities of soils within that zone. Each zone
a river/stream scene. Include plants, trees, fish, invertebrates. Make a pictorial diagram of a food chain for a native freshwater fish. Compare it to a food chain of an introduced fish. Conduct a survey of people around you (adults and students) to find out their knowledge about native freshwater fish. Write at least five questions you can ask to check their knowledge. Present the information you gain in two different types of graphs (bar, pie, leaf and stem etc). Copy a map of the
39% Cultural/historical 48 70% Ecological/scientific 41 59% page 9 3.2 Land tenure The foreshore and seabed is deemed to be owned by the Crown, except where there is a surveyed title (around New Zealand, it is estimated that less than 1% of the New Zealand foreshore is privately owned1). However, Crown ownership of the foreshore and seabed has been disputed in some quarters and in June 2003 the Court of Appeal ruled that South Island Iwi could take a claim for the