Clarifications about untrue statements in the media regarding Kauri Dieback
Matt Albert Munro made this Official Information request to Auckland Council
The request was successful.
From: Matt Albert Munro
Dear Auckland Council,
1) Is it true that the last survey of the Waitākere Ranges found that “70% of infected trees are within 50 meter of a track” or “70% of the (Kauri Dieback) problem is within 50 meter of tracks”?
2) Did the last survey of the Waitākere Ranges provide evidence that the rate of infection close to tracks is significantly higher than in general?
3) Is it true that (in the last survey of the Waitākere Ranges) only from 25% of Kauri trees which were assessed as having Kauri Dieback PTA spores could be retrieved from the tree or from the soil around them? That information was found in a book about Kauri by Joanna Orwin.
4) Had the Waitākere Kauri Dieback Report ever a positive external peer review? If so who was the reviewer and can you please provide his assessment.
5) Was the Waitākere Kauri Dieback Report 2017 ever orderly published in a scientific journal?
6) Was the closure of the Waitākere Ranges based on hard evidence (that people walking the tracks indeed significantly contribute to the increase in Kauri Dieback) or based on a precautionary approach?
Yours faithfully,
Matt Munro
From: Official Information
Auckland Council
Dear Matt,
Thank you for your request for information about statements in the media
regarding Kauri Dieback.
I have attached an information sheet on our processes and requirements
under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
We will respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no
later than 20 working days after the day your request was received.
If you have further questions please feel free to contact Angela Hare
([1][email address]) on 09 301 0101, quoting reference
8140008820.
Kind regards,
The Privacy and LGOIMA team
Auckland Council
From: Matt Albert Munro
<[2][FOI #15799 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, 15 June 2021 11:50 AM
To: Official Information <[3][email address]>
Subject: Official Information request - Clarifications about untrue
statements in the media regarding Kauri Dieback
Dear Auckland Council,
1) Is it true that the last survey of the Waitākere Ranges found that “70%
of infected trees are within 50 meter of a track” or “70% of the (Kauri
Dieback) problem is within 50 meter of tracks”?
2) Did the last survey of the Waitākere Ranges provide evidence that the
rate of infection close to tracks is significantly higher than in general?
3) Is it true that (in the last survey of the Waitākere Ranges) only from
25% of Kauri trees which were assessed as having Kauri Dieback PTA spores
could be retrieved from the tree or from the soil around them? That
information was found in a book about Kauri by Joanna Orwin.
4) Had the Waitākere Kauri Dieback Report ever a positive external peer
review? If so who was the reviewer and can you please provide his
assessment.
5) Was the Waitākere Kauri Dieback Report 2017 ever orderly published in a
scientific journal?
6) Was the closure of the Waitākere Ranges based on hard evidence (that
people walking the tracks indeed significantly contribute to the increase
in Kauri Dieback) or based on a precautionary approach?
Yours faithfully,
Matt Munro
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[4][FOI #15799 email]
Is [5][Auckland Council request email] the wrong address for
Official Information requests to Auckland Council? If so, please contact
us using this form:
[6]https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[7]https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please
ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA
page.
show quoted sections
From: Angela Hare
Auckland Council
Customer Response.pdf
209K
Download
View as HTML
Attachment 1 Peer Review.pdf
474K
Download
View as HTML
kauri dieback waitakere ranges report.pdf
8.8M
Download
View as HTML
Kia ora Matt
Thank you for your request for information about Kauri dieback disease.
Please find attached our customer response letter and associated other
attachments. If you require any further information please feel free to
contact me.
Ngā mihi nui
Angela Hare │Privacy and Official Information
Auckland Council - Te Kaunihera ō Tāmaki Makaurau
Auckland Council, Level 25 135 Albert St, Private Bag 92300, Auckland 1142
Championing engaged, open and innovative democracy and decision-making for
the diverse communities of Tāmaki Makaurau
Visit our website: [1]www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
[2]Auckland Council
CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that
may be confidential and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the
intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or
attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email
message in error please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the
message and attachments. We do not accept responsibility for any viruses
or similar carried with our email, or any effects our email may have on
the recipient computer system or network. Any views expressed in this
email may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily
reflect the views of Council.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/
From: Matt Albert Munro
Dear Angela Hare,
Thank your for the response!
I have serious doubts that question 4 was answered correctly. My question was "Had the Waitākere Kauri Dieback Report ever a positive external peer review?"
The attached written review doesn't appear to be an assessment with an overall positive outcome.
Can you please check this again, including contacting the reviewer Tony Beauchamp and getting his confirmation.
Please note the the biggest closure of public land in New Zealand was the result of the Waitakere Kauri Dieback Report 2017, so it is indeed very important to confirm it has been positively peer reviewed.
I am also not happy with answer number 2 which is not totally clear. Interestingly you provided in answer 6 the statement "... the 2017 report did not set out to measure prevalence of disease which would determine whether the area near to the track network was any more or less diseased than other areas in the Waitākere Ranges ..."
Can you please add this statement to answer 2 to make it unambiguous.
Yours sincerely,
Matt Albert Munro
From: Angela Hare
Auckland Council
Kia ora Matt
Thank you for your email. I have shared your comments with the team who provided the information in your response.
They have advised the following “We stand by the response to this request for information stated, however note that the requestor can contact the peer reviewer independently to better understand the review of the Kauri Dieback report.”
Ngā mihi nui
Angela Hare | Senior Privacy & Official Information Business Partner
Governance Services | Auckland Council
Phone: (09) 890 4637 | [mobile number]
Auckland Council, 135 Albert Street, Auckland
Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
show quoted sections
From: Matt Albert Munro
Dear Angela Hare,
I contacted the reviewer but he did not respond.
For a scientific paper to be classified as "peer reviewed" it's not enough that a review is written but the overall assessment must be positive. The attached review doesn't appear to be an overall positive assessment.
I therefore would like to see a confirmation from the reviewer that his evaluation was indeed positive.
Yours sincerely,
Matt Albert Munro
From: Angela Hare
Auckland Council
Kia ora Matt
Thank you for your email.
As advised previously we suggest you contact the reviewer independently for his comments.
Ngā mihi nui
Angela Hare | Senior Privacy & Official Information Business Partner
Governance Services | Auckland Council
Phone: (09) 890 4637 | [mobile number]
Auckland Council, 135 Albert Street, Auckland
Visit our website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
show quoted sections
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence (note: this contains the same information already available above).
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this request