OIAD 3481 Documents Luke.pdf

Document 1
Approved minutes from 8 July 2021 NHF Committee meeting #102
Present:
• Jan Riddel  (via speaker phone)
• Gerry McSweeney (via Teams)
ACT
• Sue Yerex (via Teams)
• Gina Solomon (via Teams)
• Paula Smith (via Teams))
• Bruce Hill (DOC)
• Kees Hyink (DOC)
• David Talbot (DOC)
1. Jan opened the meeting at 4pm and congratulated Gerry and Gina for their respective
recognition in the New Year and Queens Birthday honours. Gerry is now a “Companion of
INFORMATION
Order of Merit”, whilst Gina is a “Member of the Order of Merit”.
2. Gina commented positively on the Committee’s progress in giving effect to its Conservation
Act section 4 obligations. Gina considered that Jo-Ella Sarich’s (DOC legal) presentation on
this matter was very useful and asked if the Committee had given any thought to the
scenarios Jo-El a posed. The Committee has not done this yet. Al  agreed that how the
OFFICIAL
Committee gives effect to s4 is a work in progress.
3. The minutes from the November 24-25 2020 meeting were accepted with one smal  change.
THE
Paula passed a motion that these minutes be confirmed, Sue seconded, carried.
4. Jan asked David Talbot to discuss the NHF’s finances. David explained how the $5 million of
funding to the NHF came from Departmental budgets. This $5 million dealt with
overspending of the NHF fund, in due to the multi-year Ōhau Downs purchase. Parts of the
UNDER
DOC financial tracking system also contributed to this overspend. David noted that this
problem has also occurred with other DOC funds that fund multi-year projects.
Paula asked about the overspending, Kees said that the multi-year purchase at Ōhau Downs
had some bearing on this.
In summary, David said that the NHF has $4.7 million to allocate. He also stated that DOC
RELEASED
came very close to a having a budget bid accepted for an increase to the NHF funding for the
2020/21 FY, associated with the implementation of the Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity
Strategy. He is hopeful that the NHF will receive additional funding to assist with the
implementation of the proposed National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity.
1

David said that there’s $4,495,000 allocate to existing SILNA cases, and explained that the
previous government had taken $1,800,000 of unal ocated SILNA funding. David raised the
need for a process to approach the present al ocations and options for funding.
5. s9(2)(b)(ii)
ACT
6. s9(2)(j)
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
s9(2)(b)(ii)
7.
UNDER
8.s9(2)(j)
RELEASED
2

s9(2)(j)
ACT
The meeting finished at 5pm
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED
3

Document 2
Approved minutes for urgent consideration of s9(2)(b)(ii)

application (15/07), meeting #103, 31 August 2021
24/11/21 motion to accept moved by Gerry, seconded by Paula, carried.
Date: 31 August 2021, 5-5.30pm via phone
ACT
Present: Jan Riddel (Chair), Gerry McSweeney, Gina Solomon, Sue Rickman, Paula Smith, and in
support Bruce Hil and Kees Hyink (DOC).
Gina opened the meeting with a karakia.
Jan provided the fol owing background to this application:
s9(2)(b)(ii)
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED
4

s9(2)(b)(ii)
ACT
The meeting closed at 5.30pm
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED
5

Document 3
Approved minutes for NHF Committee meeting #103
Date: 24 November 2021, 4:30pm via Teams
Present: NHF Committee members - Jan Riddell (Chair), Gina Solomon, Gerry McSweeney, Paula
Smith, Sue Rickman. DOC - Jacqui Tizard (Funds Advisor), Kees Hyink (Funds Manager), Sofia
Etchegoin (Funds Advisor).
I.
Gina opened the meeting with a karakia.
ACT
II.
Jan provided the following update in the Chair report:
- The Committee is working to improve the application process to accommodate for different
types of applications.
- The Committee is stil pending an audience with Minister Kiritapu Al en to better understand
her priorities in relation to the NHF.
III.
Gerry confirmed the minutes from the 31 August telephone conference regarding the
s9(2)(b)(ii)
INFORMATION
application. Seconded by Paula.
IV.
a) Jacqui confirmed there is $4.5 million of funding available with no commitments
registered against it. Note, this figure assumes no NHF funds are allocated to s9(2)(j)
or s9(2)(b)(ii) applications.
b) Quick update on open NHF cases: OFFICIAL
s9(2)(b)(ii)
THE
agree that, if possible, a public announcement would be fantastic.
s9(2)(j)
UNDER
V.
Applications for consideration
s9(2)(b)(ii)
RELEASED
6

s9(2)(b)(ii)
s9(2)(j)
ACT
INFORMATION
s9(2)(b)(ii)
OFFICIAL
THE
d)
21/04 Galt Wainuiototo New C
UNDER hum
The Committee agreed to support this application, given the strong iwi backing and potential
learnings on the col aborative approach with the groups involved. They noted a risk of competition
from private buyers to develop the area and the limited timeframes.
Kees provided DOC context:
1. Concern over proximity to significant kauri dieback site, DOC would want access to be very
RELEASED
limited.
2. Concerned about public expectation to upgrade access at southern end of beach (e.g.
toilets)
3. Other iwi groups may have interest in area
Further information is needed about the New Zealand Coastal Trust.
7

Discussion about the various types of covenants and their relative flexibility to protect different
values.
Clarity is needed on:
1. The land protection required (given the importance of the area to local iwi and the cultural,
historic and conservation values)
2. Who will own the land?
3. How it will be managed given potential conflicting interests of groups involved?
Actions:
ACT
1. Kees/Jacqui to draft letter to s9(2)(a)on behalf of Jan seeking clarity on proposed form of
protection and long-term management approach.
2. Kees/Jacqui to seek update on Tender outcome.
3. Kees/Jacqui to speak to local DOC about their wishes for protection and management should
the committee recommend funding
4. Committee to meet early next week to discuss and make final recommendations.
Summary of discussions on applications for consideration
INFORMATION
Application
Recommendation
Further Action
s9(2)(b)(ii)
s9(2)(j)
OFFICIAL
s9(2)(b)(ii)
21/04 Galt
Likely fund up to ful  am
THE ount  Kees/Jacqui to seek further information
Wainuiototo New
of s9(2)(b)(ii)
from applicant and local DOC. Committee to
Chum
discuss further early next week
The meeting closed at 6.10pm.
UNDER
Note:
The Committee met virtually again at 4.30pm on Tuesday 30th November to discuss the additional
information provided by s9(2)(a)  about application 21/04 (DOC-6850757). The Committee did
not meet quorum, so the draft recommendations were provided via email. All Committee members
approved the recommendation to fund 21/04 Galt Wainuiototo New Chum (see DOC-6860180).
RELEASED
8

Document 4
Approved minutes for NHF Committee meeting #104
Date: 1 March 2022, via Teams
Present: NHF Committee members - Gina Solomon, Gerry McSweeney, Paula Smith, Sue Rickman.
DOC - Jacqui Tizard (Funds Advisor), Kees Hyink (Funds Manager)
Apologies: Jan Riddell (Chair)
ACT
Meeting started: 5.39pm
I.
Gina opened with karakia
s9(2)(b)(ii)
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
III.
Update on New Chums application and communication with the Minister
UNDER
a. Gerry summarised timeline on previous memo and discussion with Minister.
b. Kees- Coastal Trust have purchased the land, underwritten by individuals on
assumption that other funding would become available. DOC and Trust have
preference for a QEI  covenant instead of a DOC conservation covenant largely
to avoid costs falling on DOC. s9(2)(b)(ii) prefers conservation covenant.
Gerry adamant that s9(2)(b)(ii) can be convinced of merits of QEI  covenant,
and that DOC wil  not end up with costs associated with covenant. NZ Coastal
Trust currently owns the property but likely to set up a new local entity to vest it
RELEASED to.
c. Committee’s current recommendation of funding it on condition of permanent
protection (no specific recommendation on type) stil  stands.
d. Gina highlighted her desire to meet the Minister to clean things up because
everything is messy. Gerry discussed his discussions with Penny Nelson.
e. Kees and Jacqui are working with Minister’s office to work through official steps
for organising meeting.
9

IV.
Punakaiki application to be considered under urgency
a. Land adjoins Paparoa NP, entrance to Great Walk, nesting colony of taiko.
b. To be assessed under urgency given vendor has another offer on property (don’t
know how much offer is).
c. Gerry believes it meets all criteria. It is an enclave. If not protected, could lead to
lots of issues for DOC and conservation values if it was to be developed.
Purchasing it now could reduce the costs DOC might face in future. Proposal that
Conservation Volunteers NZ could contribute to regeneration. Valuation
provided. Alluvial wetland means it will recover quickly; it is the “heart of the
valley”.
ACT
d. Want permanent protection probably as a reserve.
e. Sue supports. Very strong recreational values. 10K walkers in last year
f. Paula thinks application doesn’t meet criteria that well but that maybe that is an
issue with the criteria. She supports the strategic approach to purchasing to
prevent inappropriate development of site but believes the natural heritage
values of the site are not as strong. General y supportive but wording of
recommendation important. Criteria need updates.
g. Gina excited by land but disappointed by application itself. Lack of information
on the value of area to iwi. From the presence of taonga species it should be
obvious that this is an important area for tangata whenua. DOC as applicants
INFORMATION
should know that and it does not need to be spelt out by iwi reps.
h. Already bought 250ha from owner, this would be an expansion on existing
investments.
i. Committee supports recommending the application for funding.
j. Add ~$3K for removal of fencing.
k. The amount to recommend will be confirmed by the committee via email.
OFFICIAL
V.
Gerry submission to DOC on Streamlining the stewardship land reclassification process
a. Gina would like info from DOC
b. Public submissions open until 18th March
THE
c. Paula has conflict of interest over stewardship land. She will assent from
discussion
d. Noted that Committee cannot approve anything. Wording should be changed to
Committee providing advice.
Actions
UNDER
I.
Jacqui to send Information on public consultation about Stewardship land reclassification.
II.
Jacqui to circulate draft recommendations for Committee comment including amount of
funding recommended for Punakaiki
III.
Jacqui and Kees to submit updated recommendations to Minister.
Meeting closed: Approximately 6.50pm
RELEASED
10

Document 5
Approved minutes for NHF Committee meeting #105
Approved on 26 November 2022
Date: 28 June 2022, DOC Murihiku office, Invercargill
Present: NHF Committee members – Jan Riddell, Gina Solomon, Gerry McSweeney (acting Chair),
Paula Smith, Sue Rickman. DOC – Bruce Hil  (Funds Advisor), Kees Hyink (Funds Manager- via Teams),
Sam Rowland (Principal Strategy Implementation Advisor- Te mana o te Taiao- via Teams), Brian  ACT
Rance (Technical Advisor Ecology), Colin Bishop (Operations Lead Tiakina Nga Manu).
Meeting started: 8.30am
1. Gina opened the meeting with a karakia.
2. Welcome and housekeeping (Bruce)
3. All previous meetings minutes (below) were approved.
• 8 July 2021
INFORMATION
• 24 November 2021
• 1 March 2022
4. Gerry (arrived at 9am) spoke about the current stewardship land review. He commented that the
system is complex, but overal , he’s happy with DOC’s process.
OFFICIAL
Action- Bruce to check if he can provide the Committee access to the DOC GIS layer showing areas
protected using NHF funding, and caveats about this layer’s content. If access can be provided. the
Committee can use this layer should they wish when submitting on this stage of the stewardship
THE
land review.
5. Kees gave an update on the new MOC and DOC. With the new MOC’s arrival the appointment of
the new Committee member and Committee chair has been delayed. DOC is also undergoing
internal changes, focused on tiers 2
UNDER  and 3 (DDG and directors respectively). The new structure will
be up and running on 3/10/22.
These changes are in part due to budgetary pressures, especially with Covid adversely affecting
DOC’s income from concessions. These budgetary pressures are significant, and may impact the
NHF when DOC Operations consider the management costs of potential NHF funded purchases
that become PCL.
RELEASED
Kees also mentioned that Mike Slater is retiring.
Action - Gerry to email Mike on behalf of the Committee, thanking him for his support of the NHF
and wishing him the best for the future.
11

s9(2)(j)
ACT
6. Open issues
INFORMATION
a) Bruce explained that at 1 July 2022 the NHF will have ~$6.9 million to allocate. This amount
comprises funds not spent previously and a ~$1.8 mil ion al ocated in the 22/23 Budget.
b) Bruce provided an update on the fol owing open NHF cases
OFFICIAL
Case number  Case name
Current state
What’s required to complete the case
04/03
Koer
Easement still to be surveyed  Easement surveyed then registered
Stonewall
THE
04/26
Greville
May 2022- final s9(2)(b)(ii)
Close this case once the last NHF $$ is
Harbour
spent soon
spent
05/12
South
Letter recently sent to
Either the landowners use the NHF $$ or
UNDER
Chatham
landowners use the NHF $$
its returned to NHF general fund, or
Animal
allocated to this case by
repurposed
control
1/8/22 or lose it
s9(2)(j)
RELEASED
12/04
Al an Bush,
Last $$ spent
Bruce to close this case
Carterton
13/02
Earthquakes,  Last $$ spent
Bruce to close this case
Duntroon
12

14/02
Fantail Rise
Restoration planting still
Close once Murihiku DOC have spent the
happening
remaining $$. This is likely in 23/24
15/08
Rosser
With Statutory Land
Management (SLM)
15/09
Nell Block,
Need to close, transfer
Bruce to close this case
surplus ~$80k into the NHF
general budget
15/11
Bethells
Applicant to provide DOC
ACT
Auckland their plan to deal
with the remaining
(uncovenanted) 5ha
16/07
Te Matarae
With SLM
16/09
Himitangi
Still to gazette, surplus
Gazette and deal with the surplus $43k
~$43k. Manawatu DOC have
asked about repurposing
~$7k for an opening
ceremony with three iwi
INFORMATION
17/06
Kessels
Waiting for applicant to
Close on receipt of a satisfactory fully
provide completed ASAP. On  signed ASAP
receipt, can close
18/04
Upper Taieri
Can be closed
Bruce to close this case
OFFICIAL
18/05
Ōhau Downs
Fencing is underway, once
Fencing to be completed
completed, close
THE
20/01
Hamilton
SLM organising e payment
Arranging legal support for edealing
Kawatiri
20/02
Thomson
Surveying underway
Awaiting draft survey plan
Ross  UNDER
s9(2)(j)
RELEASED
21/04
Galt
The Crown’s contribution has  Bruce to close this case
Wainuiototo
been made
New Chums
13

21/05
Punakaiki
DOC signed ASAP with
Settle then gazette per the MOC’s
vendor. Settlement wil occur decision
once we’ve received copy of
signed ASAP
Actions: Bruce to:
s9(2)(b)(ii)
• Upper Taieri- update the Committee about the Taiari Nga Awa project, so that they
understand how the NHF fund purchases fit into this.
ACT
s9(2)(b)(ii)
7. Morning tea 10.-10.20am
8. MOC’s letter of expectation:
DOC staff and the Committee discussed how to best support the MOC’s first item in her letter of
expectation, being that the NHF supports the implementation of Te Mana o te Taiao (Aotearoa New
INFORMATION
Zealand Biodiversity Strategy- the strategy). Sam Rowland (Te Mana o te Taiao implementation
team) to give an overview of the NHF’s role in supporting the ANZBS’s implementation plan (the
plan). Sam’s presentation is contained in appendix one. In summary Sam described how the
fol owing three options would support the strategy’s implementation.
• Option 1. BAU, open funding round, applications assessed against the current criteria. Sam
considered this option would deliver on the strategy’s objective that details the NHF’s role in
OFFICIAL
implementing the strategy and would meet two of the strategy’s goals. This option would
also meet the strategy’s implementation plan.
• Option 2. A targeted funding round, focusing on specified ecosystem types. These are
THE
detailed in appendix 2. In addition to the provisions met by option 1, this option would
meet an additional objective and two additional goals. It would be better aligned to the
strategy, and enable stronger story telling.
• Option 3. Revision of the NHF’s criteria, based on the advice contained in appendix 3. Sam
considered that this would meet the same strategy’s provisions as option 2, but be more
UNDER
strongly aligned to the strategy, and have greater story telling ability.
Action- Bruce to circulate to the Committee the plan’s provision that details the NHF’s role in
implementing Te Mana o te Taiao. They can then suggest amendments to it so that better
summarises the NHF’s purpose. The objective and action is below.
Objective 8: Resourcing and support are enabling connected, active guardians of nature.
Action- Continue to help private landowners, local government, community groups and
RELEASED
others to protect high-value ecosystems through the Nature Heritage Fund.
Jan commented that should the NPS on Indigenous Biodiversity be gazetted, there could be a
demand from SNA owners on the NHF for funding.
Action- Bruce to contact the DOC policy staff working on the NPS and tell them how the NHF works
and its current budget.
14

Brian Rance (DOC ecologist) then to discuss options with the Committee, who at this meeting
favoured option 2. If this option was pursued, Brian considered that DOC could liaise with others
QEI reps, Forest and Bird staff, botanical societies to publicise such a funding round. The Committee
and DOC agreed that such a round would not preclude the consideration of applications for funding
to protect areas containing ecosystems that were not targeted. The Committee however want to
workshop these three options with DOC before making recommendations to the MOC on how
they’re supporting the strategy’s implementation.
Action- Bruce to organise a meeting between the Committee and DOC to workshop these options.
The workshop’s intended outcome is the Committee arriving at options they can put to the MOC,
and recommend one of these. This workshop wil take place once the new committee member is ACT
inducted.
9. Update on Waitutu pest control- Colin Bishop (DOC Operations Lead Tiakina Nga Manu). Colin
gave a very well received presentation on the mammalian pest control DOC has undertaken in
the Waitutu. Some of this control work was funded by NHF SILNA funding. Colin mentioned that
budgetary pressures are making it difficult to undertaking the monitoring needed to determine
when and where pest treatment is needed. Gerry raised the possibility of using NHF SILNA
budget to fund this work.
INFORMATION
Action- Bruce to determine if there’s any unal ocated SILNA funding that possibly could be
contributed to the Waitutu monitoring work.
10. Brian Rance and Pat Hoffmann (Waituna site lead for Living Water (DOC/Fonterra partnership)
did a health and safety briefing for the Waituna site visit, and provided context about this area.
OFFICIAL
11. Meeting closed at about 12.30pm with a karakia
12. Lunch 12.15-1.00pm
THE
13. Field trip to Waituna, including to several areas purchased using NHF funds purchases. DOC staff
Brian Rance, Pat Hoffmann and Johlene Kelly (Biodiversity supervisor) lead this trip. Left 1.30
pm, returned ~5pm.
UNDER
RELEASED
15

Document 6
Approved minutes of NHF meeting 106, via Teams 1.30-3pm
26/11/22
Attendees:
Committee
• Sue Rickman
ACT
• Paula Smith
• Gerry McSweeney
• Aroha Mead
Apologies from Gina Solomon
DOC
• Bruce Hill
• Kees Hyink
INFORMATION
1. Sue opened with a karakia.
2. The minutes from the Invercargill meeting (#105) were discussed, and several minor
amendments were made. Paula moved the minutes acceptance, Sue seconded, this motion was
carried.
OFFICIAL
3. Sue welcomed Aroha to the Committee. Al attendees introduced themselves.
4. Bruce gave an overview of item 1. This item provided the rationale for a funding round
THE
prioritising 17 specified threatened naturally uncommon ecosystems, with applications
containing other ecosystems being a second priority. He explained DOC developed this advice as
it was the Committee’s favoured option, for progressing the NHF’s support of Te Mana o te
Taiao implementation, of three discussed at meeting #105. In response to query from Aroha, it
was agreed this approach wouldn’t create a geographic bias. Both Gerry and Paula provided
UNDER
Aroha an overview of the protective mechanisms available. All agreed that the ideal time for
opening this funding round is the end of November or early December 2022 and closing the end
of February 2023.
5. There was discussion about whether the cost of managing new areas of PCL created via NHF
funding may deter DOC from making applications. Kees and Bruce commented that the MOC
expects the Committee to consider this cost when making funding recommendations.
RELEASED
6. Sue commented that at the MOC’s recent visit to the West Coast and announcement of the
Punakaiki and Hamilton/Kawatiri purchases, the Committee wasn’t represented. Gerry also
noted the same occurred that at a recent unveiling of new Pou Whenua at Kura Tawhiti/Castle
Hill (an area purchased by the Crown via the NHF).
The Funds team will investigate options for ensuring the NHF is appropriately acknowledged at
public announcements in future, including potential attendance by Committee members.
16

7. The Committee agreed the next meeting wil  focus on items 2 (DOC’s advice on revised NHF
ecological criteria), 3 (NHF operating processes) and 4 (climate change), and the process for
managing the upcoming round and next meeting.
8. Bruce gave an update of the current cases. The Committee asked about the role of SLM
(Statutory Land Management). Bruce explained SLM undertake the conveyance on behalf of the
Crown. SLM is currently very busy, so the completion dates of some NHF cases has been
extended. Bruce commented that once several new roles at DOC are well established, he’l  close
several cases.
ACT
9. Gerry asked about using any unal ocated NHF SILNA funding or some of the NHF administration
budget to fund further pest monitoring in the Waitutu (Murihiku/Southland). Bruce commented
that al  the NHF SILNA budget is al ocated. Kees said that the NHF’s SILNA should be discussed in
future but that appropriate advice needs to be sought within DOC.
10. The meeting closed about 3pm.
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED
17

Document 7
Approved minutes from the NHF Committee teams meeting #107 7
March 2023
Attendees
• Sue Rickman
• Gina Solomon
• Gerry McSweeney
ACT
• Paula Smith
• Aroha Mead
• Kees Hyink (DOC)
• Bruce Hill (DOC).
Sue welcomed al , everyone gave a quick update what they’ve been doing since the last meeting.
Gina opened the meeting with a karakia.
Kees proposed the process below for dealing with the applications received.
INFORMATION
Twelve applications received.
• Three DOC consider are ineligible, two as they don’t meet the NHF’s purpose, one as the
applicant isn’t requesting any funding.
• Six are complete.
• Two are incomplete.
• One is a previously approved application, for which DOC is seeking additional funding.
OFFICIAL
The Committee agreed with this breakdown. The four actions below agreed to were:
1. Three ineligible applicants THE
• DOC to explain to two of the ineligible applicants (via letter) why their application will not be
considered. DOC wil also propose future options for these applicants. It was noted that in
the future the Committee may need to consider how to assess the crossover between
commercial and cultural use.
s9(2)(b)(ii)
UNDER
• DOC to amend website to make it clearer that the NHF’s purpose is to fund the permanent
protection of areas, and that applications for solely management costs are ineligible.
2. Six complete
• DOC to acknowledge receipt, provide the Committee paper and electronic copies.
RELEASED
3. Two incomplete
• DOC to request the information required to complete these applications, then provide
updated copies to the Committee.
4. Request for additional funding
• DOC to acknowledge receipt, provide the Committee paper and electronic copies
18

s9(2)(b)(ii)
Gina lead the closing karakia and the meeting finished at 4.50pm
ACT
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED
19

ACT
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED

s9(2)(j)
ACT
s9(2)(j)
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
TOTAL FUNDING RECOMMENDED: s9(2)(j)
THE
Balance: s9(2)(j)
Deferred Applications: Additional information is required.
s9(2)(b)(ii)
UNDER
RELEASED
s9(2)(b)(ii)
22

ACT
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED

s9(2)(j)
ACT
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
s9(2)(j)
UNDER
RELEASED
32

s9(2)(j)
ACT
INFORMATION
s9(2)(b)(ii)
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED
s9(2)(b)(ii)
33

s9(2)(b)(ii)
ACT
s9(2)(j)
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED
34

s9(2)(j)
ACT
s9(2)(b)(ii)
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
s9(2)(j)
UNDER
RELEASED
35

ACT
INFORMATION
OFFICIAL
THE
UNDER
RELEASED