Waikanae Beach Debris
What is the “natural” state of beaches?
Gisborne District Council’s operations committee faced that issue yesterday when they endorsed a proposed “position” on woody debris on beaches for later adoption by council.
The position, described as aspirational and that will “only occur over time as the mechanisms are developed” states: “Woody debris on beaches needs to be managed so that all beaches are safe and in a natural state.”
GDC principal community assets and partnerships adviser Chris Visser said the “position” showed council’s intent.
There was much more work required and the “devil was in the detail”.
A position is considered to be required because of the increasing occurrence of storms and woody debris landing on beaches with council taking the lead, and the costs on ensuring beaches are cleared, or relying on the goodwill of other parties to contribute.
Key stakeholders were consulted including iwi, Eastland Wood Council, Mana Taiao Tairāwhiti, Surf LifesSaving NZ (national body and local surf clubs), Gisborne Boardriders, Sport Gisborne Tairāwhiti, Land Information New Zealand, Department of Conservation and Federated Farmers.
Feedback ranged from “unworkable” to “doesn’t go far enough and all wood needs to be removed immediately”.
Ms Visser said there was a high level of agreement over beaches being safe.
But “natural” beaches was a subjective assessment and meant different things to different people.
Council director of liveable communities Michele Frey said some members of the Eastland Wood Council considered large volumes of wood debris on beaches was natural.
Councillor Colin Alder said a pristine clean beach was not natural.
At Makorori, debris had naturally built sand dunes and contributed to fauna.
“I know where I’d rather be after a tsunami.
Cr Larry Foster said evidence or photographs to define a “natural” beach was needed.
A beach totally covered in wood was not natural.
He agreed with Cr Colin Telfer that the council could have an in-house ability to clear beaches rather than relying on contractors.
Under the “position”, the council expects beaches to be returned to a “natural” state within six weeks of woody debris appearing on the beach.
Ms Visser said six weeks was considered to be reasonable time to trace the source of the wood and seek costs.
She would like to think it could be done in a couple of days, but that would not be possible in a Cyclone Gabrielle-type situation.
Pr-emptive resource consents could speed up the process.
But there were also businesses which considered six weeks unrealistic for clean-up operation
Cr Andy Cranston said the six week period was setting high expectations in an area a with a long coast line.
Ms Frey said a “position’ including rivers and streams would be the next stage but involved different issues.
Mayor Rehette Stoltz said she was happy with “a high level position”.
Matters like funding would be the tough bit.
“But we cannot keep on tidying (the beaches) every Christmas or labour Weekend.
“We need a strategic approach.”
The Council “position” says beaches need to be cleared of woody debris so that:
1. they are safe.
2. they are left in a natural state.
3. cultural use is not impeded.
4. recreational use is not hampered
Landowners Landowners (including council), agricultural, industrial and forestry companies will adopt sustainable land use practices that prevent woody debris mobilising into rivers and, in turn, onto the beaches.
Council expects landowners, agricultural, industrial and forestry companies to clean beaches at their cost if it is determined that they are the source of the woody debris.
Council will seek to attribute costs where they lie.
In principle:
1. Council will work with others to ensure the beaches are safe.
2. Council will work with others to make sure the beaches are in a Natural State.
3. Council expects beaches to be returned to Natural State within six weeks of woody debris appearing on the beach, unless it is impracticable or impossible to meet this timeframe (for example if resources have to be directed to other emergency response or recovery as a priority, weather does not permit, or resource consents cannot be obtained in this timeframe).
4. Council’s preference is that clean-up activity is coordinated and delivered by others, so long as it is done in a safe, timely and efficient manner.
5. Woody debris will be disposed of in the most environmentally conscious and sustainable way possible.
6. The costs associated with any beach clean-up (including safety interventions, physical removal and disposal costs) will be proportionally funded by the entities who are the source/contributor of the problem.
7. Council will develop and adopt mechanisms and tools to enable the above.
8. Council will review this position based on feedback from communities and stakeholders.
In order for the Council to execute its position effectively, it will need to develop:
1. A process for determining the composition and source of the woody debris.
2. A mechanism to ensure that the source of the woody debris contributes to the costs of clean up.
3. A mechanism for apportionment of costs.
4. Guidelines to ensure that the beaches are cleaned, so that they are both safe and left in a natural state.
5. A relationship mechanism with industry based around the above.
Residents say there is more to the story than Gisborne's economic ranking suggests.