Application 124771 - Ministry of Fisheries

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6 2011) identified that the aquaculture industry contributed $31.4 million to Waikato’s regional GDP in 2010/11. In respect of this application, potential socioeconomic effects include employment opportunities from managing, transporting and processing additional product. 4.2.3 The applicant would continue to utilise their existing land-based facilities and support infrastructure associated with the existing consented farm. The applicant considers these facilities to be sufficient and adequate to service the proposed one hectare extension. 4.2.4 In terms of socio-economic impacts on other parties, the extension to the farm would contribute to the recreational fishing opportunities for boating fishers near the farm. It is currently common practice for recreational fishers to tie up to mussel buoys and fish within the farmed areas. Public access to the farm would not be restricted. 4.2.5 In respect of cultural effects it is considered that the extension would have no impacts on cultural matters. The applicant is not aware that the site of the extension is of any significance to tangata whenua. To the knowledge of the applicant, no cultural issues have been raised in relation to farming in this area. 4.3 Any physical effect on the locality, including any landscape and visual effects Landscape and Visual Effects 4.3.1 The proposed farm extension is located on the northern and western edges of the existing farm. The extension is at its closest boundary approximately (but no closer than) 50 metres from shore. The visual impact of the additional one hectare over and above the impact of the existing farm is considered to be less than minor. There are no dwellings overlooking the existing farm. 4.3.2 The farm is located offshore from Moturua Island. The natural character of the area is already altered by the presence of the existing 3 farms. Moturua Island is uninhabited and is primarily bush clad. The proposed additional one hectare would have minimal additional impact on the natural character of the area due to the small size of the extension and the distance off-shore. In addition the visibility of the buoys is only a smaller proportion of the overall surface area of the farm due to the requirement to accommodate the anchor warps (which are beneath the water line). 4.3.3 The plan requires orange buoys to delineate the farms (corners and middle of the most seaward and most landward lines). This not only identifies each farm block but it also has a significant safety role, as it serves to warn other users of the marine environment of the farm boundaries. Therefore although bright in colour, these buoys serve as an extra navigational aid for other marine users. 6
7 4.3.4 The buoys would not be visible from the mainland (distance of approximately 8kms). The buoys would be visible from the Island from different viewing perspectives. However the extra lines envisaged by the extension would have minimal additional visual impact as the focus point would generally be on the farm as a whole and not on the additional lines. The currently established farm also blends into the backdrop landscape of the Island when viewed from sea. 4.3.5 The two navigation lights marking the seaward-most corners of the farm would have a range of 1 nautical mile. The existing light at corner A would not be required to be moved, while the existing light at corner A would be moved to corner F (refer Appendix 1 map). In discussion with the Harbourmaster, lighting of corners E & C were not required as there is a lack of safe passage between the farm and the shore. Therefore there would be no increase in visual effects over and above the existing lighting. 4.3.6 The marine vessels that are currently utilised in the farming of the consented site, being harvesting barges and small service crafts, all provide occasional minor visual attraction. No additional barges or craft over and above what is used currently to service the existing farm would be used to service the proposed additional lines within the one hectare extension. Coastal Processes 4.3.7 In relation to the effects on coastal processes, reference is made to the attached scientific report (Appendix 2) and the report: Taylor D, Clark D, Keeley N and Goodwin E, 2012. Assessment of Benthic and Water Column Effects from Inshore Coromandel Mussel Farms. Prepared for a Collective of Coromandel Mussel Farmers. Cawthron Institute. In addition reference is made to the Cawthron Report 1 which reviews literature related to the effects of mussel farming on coastal processes. This report notes that the presence of farms can alter and reduce current speeds and can attenuate short-period waves. It further notes that “these issues are not considered significant at the present scale of development in New Zealand” (pv). 4.3.8 Based on the information reviewed in the above reports, it is considered that the overall effects of the one hectare extension on coastal processes will be negligible. 4.4 Any effect on ecosystems, including effects on plants or animals and any physical disturbance of habitats in the vicinity 4.4.1 In relation to the effects on ecosystems, reference is made to the attached scientific report (Appendix 2) and the report: Taylor D, Clark D, Keeley N and 1 Keeley, N. et al., 2009. Sustainable Aquaculture in New Zealand: Review of the Ecological Effects of Farming Shellfish and Other Nonfish Species. Prepared for Ministry of Fisheries. Cawthron Report No 1476 7
Page 1 and 2:
Waikato Regional Council Private Ba
Page 3:
REPORT NO. 2134 ASSESSMENT OF BENTH
Page 6 and 7:
MAY 2012 REPORT NO. 2134 | CAWTHRON
Page 8 and 9:
CAWTHRON INSTITUTE | REPORT NO. 213
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23: CAWTHRON INSTITUTE | REPORT NO. 213
Page 66 and 67: To: Waikato Regional Council Privat
Page 68 and 69: Contents 2 Contents ...............
Page 70 and 71: 4 marine farm (which expires on 1 J
Page 74 and 75: 8 Goodwin E, 2012. Assessment of Be
Page 76 and 77: 10 4.5.8 The capacity of the wharf
Page 78 and 79: 12 in Appendix 1 and designed in ac
Page 80 and 81: 7. Relevant Planning Provisions 14
Page 82 and 83: 16 the applicant is a member of the
Page 84 and 85: 7.18 Policy 6.1.3 - (Integrated Man
Page 86: Appendix 1: Survey plan showing loc
Page 89: REPORT NO. 2167 COROMANDEL MUSSEL F
show all

Application 124771 - Ministry of Fisheries

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?