BEFORE THE SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL & THE SOUTHLAND
REGIONAL COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF: the Resource Management Act
1991
AND
IN THE MATTER OF: a resource consent application by
the Southland District Council to
construct a cycle trail from
Mt Nicholas Road bridge over the
Oreti River to map reference NZMS
260 D43:290-127
EVIDENCE OF NICHOLAS PAUL GOLDWATER
Dated 22 January 2015
Instructing Solicitors for Southland District Council:
Scholefield Cockroft Lloyd
PO Box 166
Invercargill 9840
Tel: 03 2184089
Counsel for Southland District Council:
Clare Lenihan
102 Jed Street
Invercargill 9810
Tel: (03) 214 1674
© 2015
1
3467a
STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF NICHOLAS PAUL GOLDWATER
INTRODUCTION
1.
My full name is Nicholas Paul Goldwater.
2.
I have a Graduate Diploma in Science and Master of Science (First Class
Honours) in ecology and environmental science, and have seven years’
experience as an ecologist working for a private consultancy, based in
Auckland. I am a Senior Ecologist with Wildland Consultants Ltd, an ecological
consultancy company specialising in ecological evaluations, ecological
restoration, ecological survey and monitoring, and ecological research. In this
role I undertake field assessments, provide technical ecological advice and
services and manage projects for a range of clients.
3.
I have specialist skills in aquatic, wetland and terrestrial assessments and
monitoring.I have undertaken numerous aquatic assessments in the Auckland,
Northland, and Wellington regions, including many Stream Ecological
Valuations (SEV) I have appeared as an expert witness at hearings and
Environment Court where I have presented evidence in relation to aquatic
assessments and effects.
4.
My professional affiliations include the New Zealand Ecological Society and the
New Zealand Plant Conservation Network.
5.
I am familiar with the matters to which these proceedings relate.
6.
I have read the Environment Court’s Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses,
and agree to comply with it. My qualifications as an expert are set out above. I
confirm that the issues addressed in this evidence are within my area of
expertise.
7.
I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or
detract from the opinions expressed.
SCOPE OF EVIDENCE
8.
My evidence will cover the following:
© 2015
2
3467a
 Brief overview of the project.
 Brief descriptions of the study sites.
 Potential ecological effects of a proposed cycleway bridge across the Oreti
River.
 Potential ecological effects of a proposed cycleway boardwalk on the
margins of a large wetland at Ashton Flats-North.
 Measures to avoid, remedy, or mitigate any potential adverse ecological
effects.
 Response to submitters.
 Review of the recommended conditions of consent
SUMMARY OF MAIN CONCLUSIONS
9.
The proposed bridge construction works could potentially result in injury to, or
mortality of, some aquatic fauna, although the effects will be restricted to the
works footprint and will be no more than minor. Works will not be undertaken
during trout spawning season.
10. Any sediment released during the drilling of holes for bridge piles will rapidly
dissipate in the water column. Similarly, any heavy metals that leach from the
tanalised timber used to construct the bridge will be rapidly dispersed and will
become extremely diluted. As a precautionary measure, all timber will be
covered and dried for at least two months prior to installation of the bridge.
11. The proposed boardwalk at Ashton Flats-North will avoid encroachment into the
wetland by utilising an existing four-wheel drive track. As long as vehicles and
machinery avoid the wetland vegetation, and appropriate weed hygiene
measures are implemented, the effects of the boardwalk are considered to be
no more than minor.
12. Works will be undertaken so as to avoid disturbing threatened indigenous birds
nesting on the river bed.
13. Each of the issues raised in the submissions, where relevant, can either be
avoided or mitigated so that effects will be no more than minor.
© 2015
3
3467a
14. There will be no long-term adverse ecological effects on the river and adjacent
terraces.
OVERVIEW
15. Southland District Council (SDC) requires resource consents to construct a
bridge across the Oreti River and bridges, culverts and boardwalk near a
wetland at Ashton Flats-North, all of which are to facilitate the construction of
the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail. The upper reaches of the Oreti River,
including the location of the proposed bridge, are protected under a Water
Conservation Order, which recognises its value as habitat for brown trout
(Salmo trutta) and black-billed gulls (Larus bulleri), its angling amenity, and its
tikanga value to Māori.
SITE DESCRIPTIONS
16. I visited the sites on 1 July 2014 during overcast, occasionally wet weather. I
recorded general descriptions of the (i) river morphology, substrate, terraces,
and vegetation at the site of a proposed cycleway bridge, and (ii) wetland
vegetation at the site of a proposed cycleway boardwalk at Ashton Flats-North.
17. The river at the proposed bridge crossing is c.40 m wide, 0.3-0.6 m deep, and
is fast-flowing. The substrate comprises large boulders and stones, and
gravels. The true right river bank is undercut where the river terrace is more
elevated (c.0.5 m above the water surface), exposing the underlying friable
alluvium. The river terraces, which are grazed by sheep (Ovis aries), are
dominated by rough exotic pasture mostly comprising browntop (Agrostis
capillaris) with occasional Scotch thistle (Cirsium vulgare).
18. The wetland at Ashton Flats-North is one of several large wetland complexes
that occur on the valley floor in this area. The Ashton Flats generally consist of
fescue tussock (Festuca novae-zelandiae) grassland with areas of unimproved
pasture on the more fertile sites, interspersed with indigenous shrubland and
wetlands (Rance 1998). Vegetation near the proposed cycleway boardwalk is
dominated by exotic grassland with frequent sedges (Carex spp.) and local soft
© 2015
4
3467a
rush (Juncus effusus). Eleocharis acuta occurs as an occasional emergent
species in depressions with shallow water.
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED BRIDGE ACROSS THE ORETI
RIVER
19. The use of machinery in the river channel could potentially result in injury to, or
mortality of, fish and aquatic macroinvertebrates, although this will very much
be restricted to the works footprint. Any resident fish will quickly disperse when
disturbed. An auger will be used to drill the first 1 m into the river bed to centre
the piles, which will then be driven in with a pile driver. The drilling action will
release some sediment into the river, although this will rapidly dissipate
downstream and is likely to have no more than a minor, short-term, localised
effect.
20. The Environment Southland officer’s report (Environment Southland 2014a)
draws a similar conclusion when it states that “there is likely to be a short-term
and temporary effect on water quality as a result of the release of sediment
during construction of the proposed bridge. This is not inconsistent with the
provisions of the Proposed Regional Policy Statement”.
21. Any areas of the dry riverbed that are cleared of indigenous vegetation will be
susceptible to invasion by exotic weeds.
Mouse ear hawkweed (Pilosella
officinarum), in particular, was identified by MWH (2011) as having the potential
to spread into cleared areas along the cycle trail and bridge site. Woody weeds
such as crack willow (Salix fragilis), gorse (Ulex europaeus), and Scotch broom
(Cytisus scoparius) could become more troublesome. Vehicles, machinery and
construction materials can also carry seeds and propagules of exotic plant
species.
22. Undercut river banks, particularly on the true right side of the river, will be
susceptible to collapse if driven over by machinery and vehicles. Slumping or
collapse of river banks could result in relatively large amounts of sediment
being released into the water column. There is also the potential for vehicles
and machinery to leak fuel, oil, and hydraulic fluid into the river, all of which can
have deleterious impacts on aquatic life.
© 2015
5
3467a
23. The Oreti River is probably the most important river in New Zealand for blackbilled gull (R. McClellan, Wildland Consultants, pers. comm., 10 July 2014;
McLellan 2009), which is classified as ‘Threatened-Nationally Critical’ by
Robertson et al. (2013). It also supports other threatened bird species such as
black-fronted
tern
(Chlidonias
albostriatus)
(‘Threatened-Nationally
Endangered’), banded dotterel (Charadrius bicinctus) (‘Threatened-Nationally
Vulnerable’) and black-fronted dotterel (Elseyornis melanops) (Non-resident
Native-Coloniser). There is potential for birds and/or nests of these species to
be disturbed or destroyed by vehicles and human activity during the
construction phase for the bridge, which could include the localised extraction
of gravel.
24. Tanalised timber is one of the building materials to be used to construct the
proposed bridge. Tanalised timber contains three metals used as preservatives:
chromium, copper, and arsenic (CCA), each of which is known to be toxic to
aquatic biota when present above trace levels (Weis and Weis 1995).
A
number of studies have found low to moderate amounts of leaching of these
metals from treated timber placed in water (e.g. Warner and Solomon 1990).
These toxins can accumulate in biota that live on the wood, and when these
animals are eaten the contaminants in these organisms may be transferred into
the food chain and accumulate in body tissues, with resultant deleterious
effects. Metals leached from treated wood can also be adsorbed onto fine
sediment particles, from which they can be accumulated by benthic organisms
(Weis and Weis 1995).
25. In general, leaching is reduced if the wood is dried over a period of weeks,
when compared with freshly-treated wood (HSE 2001). It is important to note
that leaching decreases markedly with time. Leaching studies show that there
is an initial rate over the first few days of use that rapidly decreases to a barely
measurable rate. Other factors include climate and the amount of CCA used,
although the main factor affecting leaching rate is exposure to high acidity
(Read 2003). Given the size of the river and the large volume of water that
flows through it, any leached contaminants will disperse rapidly and become
very diluted. I note in the Environment Southland officer’s report that the
© 2015
6
3467a
Council’s Water Scientist has assessed the proposed activities and has stated
that the bridge is unlikely to significantly affect water quality in the long-term,
particularly in relation to the potential release of contaminants from treated
timber having little to no effect.
26. Nine timber piles - in three rows of three - will be installed in the river bed to
support the bridge. Due to the considerable width of the river and the relatively
shallow water column, it is very unlikely that there will be any effect on the flow
regime, i.e. the combined upstream-facing surface area of the piles will offer
very little flow resistance and will not impede fish passage. My opinion supports
that of the Council’s Technical Services Engineer who considers that “the
proposed bridge would not adversely affect the river morphology as only a few
sets of piles would be in the river channel at any one time and would, by and
large, allow for the river to flow unimpeded” (Environment Southland 2014a).
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED BOARDWALK ON WETLAND
HABITAT AT ASHTON FLATS-NORTH
27. The proposed bridges and boardwalk are to be constructed over an existing
four-wheel drive track on legal road, where it will abut a very small part of the
wetland. Provided that vehicles and machinery avoid the wetland vegetation,
and weed hygiene measures are implemented, the effects of construction and
use of the cycle trail on the wetland will be less than minor.
OPTIONS TO AVOID, REMEDY, OR MITIGATE POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS
28. All vehicles and machinery used in the construction phase should be waterblasted prior to being taken to the site, to avoid the introduction of
environmental pest plants. All materials brought to the site should be of an
approved type and from an approved weed-free source. It is proposed to
source gravel used for construction from land-based pits instead of the river
bottom as the pits do not harbour seeds of environmental pest plants such as
gorse and broom (M. Barnett, pers. comm., 2 July 2014). Post-construction
inspections of the works sites should be carried out as part of an overall
programme to monitor potential pest plant incursion along recently constructed
parts of the cycle trail.
© 2015
7
3467a
29. All construction traffic, where possible, must attempt to utilise the existing trail
formations, e.g. 4WD tracks, farm trails or the new trail itself.
30. All vehicles and machinery must avoid undercut river banks. The locations of
these areas can be identified by erecting brightly-coloured temporary fencing.
31. Wherever possible, the proposed trail should utilise habitats that have already
been modified, such as current and existing tracks, and exotic grassland.
32. If any species of threatened river bed birds are found to be nesting within
approximately 300 m of the site, construction should not commence until the
birds have moved on (R. McClellan, Wildland Consultants, pers. comm.,
10 July 2014). As an additional precaution, it would be preferable to undertake
construction outside of the breeding season of threatened bird species known
to use the Oreti River. Black-billed gulls, banded dotterels and black-fronted
terns typically nest from September to January (Heather and Robertson 1996).
33. Fuel/oil leaks should be avoided provided that the contractor follows the
conditions specified in a report prepared by the design engineer, Frame Group
Ltd (2014). These conditions are considered to follow best practice and there is
no need to repeat them in my evidence, although I do note that in the evidence
of Giulio Chapman-Olla that contractors will carry spill kits on site at all times.
34. Any CCA that leaches from the tanalised timber used to construct the bridge
will be rapidly dispersed and will become extremely diluted. However, as a
precaution, all timber is to be covered and dried for at least two months depending on when the timber is treated - prior to installation of the bridge. The
design engineer has specified in their report that timber is to be treated and
stored for at least two months prior to installation. Treatment shall also comply
with the current requirements of the Timber Preservation Council (Frame Group
Ltd 2014).
© 2015
8
3467a
RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS
Leaching of toxicity from treated timber used as bridge piles (Submissions 89, 99,
and 115)
35. Submitter 99 raises the concern that heavy metals, namely copper, chromium
and arsenic (CCA), have the potential to leach from the treated piles and
potentially poison aquatic fauna. The submitter cites several scientific papers
(Barlow and Prew 2005; Vogeler et al. 2005; Weis and Weis 1995; Warner and
Solomon 1990), two of which “confirm leaching of highly toxic copper,
chromium and arsenic when poles were places in soil and aquifers”. On
reviewing the paper by Barlow and Prew (2005), it is evident that they found
“little or no evidence of leaching of CCA beyond 50 to 100 mm from the posts.
Neither did they “find anything which would indicate that soil microbiology was
being adversely affected”. The study also demonstrated that the highest
earthworm numbers were nearest to the posts, which led the researchers to
conclude that “the earthworms had no aversion to CCA treated posts”.
36. Vogeler et al. (2005) found that CCA leached out of the treated posts used in
their experiment. To put it into context, however, the researchers were looking
at the cumulative effects of treated posts in vineyards in the Marlborough
District. They performed modelling to simulate a one-hectare field of 580
treated posts, which in turn could indicate the likely concentrations of arsenic
leaching into the Rarangi Shallow Aquifer. I do not think it is valid to compare
the impact of hundreds of treated posts within a relatively small, discrete area
to the proposed use of far fewer posts to construct a bridge over the Oreti River
and boardwalks.
37. Submitter 99 also cites papers by Weis and Weis (1995) and Warner and
Solomon (1990), both of which found that acid conditions resulted in a greater
rate of CCA leaching from treated timber. Accordingly, Read (2003) states the
main factor affecting leaching rate is exposure to high acidity. A study by NIWA
(2007) measured the pH at two points in the Oreti River: Ashton Flats Bridge
(upstream point) and Three Kings (downstream point). The pH showed very
little variance, ranging from a minimum of 7.12 to a maximum of 7.51, which
© 2015
9
3467a
indicates mildly alkaline conditions. Pure water has a pH very close to 7. Acidity
will therefore not be an issue in relation to the leaching of CCA from treated
timber at this site.
38. In an assessment of risks associated with use of CCA-treated timber in
sensitive environments prepared for the Department of Conservation, Hedley
(1997) states that “some leaching does occur, particularly from freshly-treated
material and especially in sea water, but most studies show that this leaching
adds little to background levels of copper, chromium, and arsenic in either soil,
water or sediments”. Consequently, these levels “will not affect ecosystems
supported within these environments”.
39. A study by Comfort (1993) reports that there have been few reported
environmental problems associated with the use of CCA treated timber. In the
Tasmanian World Heritage Area, for instance, “it has been used in walking
track construction for more than 15 years with no obvious effects on the
environment”.
40. As discussed in Paragraph 24 above, it is important to allow sufficient time for
the preservatives to “fix” in the wood before it leaves the treatment facility. It is
also important to check that the timber is free of surface deposits of
preservative sludge (green-white deposits of precipitated preservative are
indicative of poor quality control). The “fixing” process is affected by time and
temperature. Hedley (1997) states that “if freshly-treated wood is stored
outdoors during winter, the reaction time may take weeks, even months, to
complete. Even at ambient temperature in summer, the reaction is unlikely to
be completed in less than two weeks. For this reason, CCA-treated wood
should never leave the treatment side for at least two weeks following
treatment”. I note that Land Use Consent (Bridge) Condition 3(c) stipulates that
the timber is rested for a minimum of three months prior to construction, which
is a conservative approach.
41. Subject to the wood being treated in accordance with prescribed specifications
and standards, and the necessary quality assurance and regulatory procedures
required for its production have been implemented, the ecological effects of
© 2015
10
3467a
using treated timber for the proposed bridge and boardwalks will be negligible.
Given these minor (if any) effects, the proposed activity - subject to best
practice guidelines - will not contravene Rule 1 of the Regional Water Plan for
Southland (2010). Discharges that are considered to have minor effects have
been provided for by permitted and controlled activity rules.
42. I note that the ES Water Quality Scientist advised that provided the timber to be
used in the bridge construction was suitably rested prior to use, the potential
effect on water quality would be no more than minor (Environment Southland
2014a).
Sedimentation resulting from driving piles into the river bed (Submissions 89 and 99)
43. Sedimentation arising from bridge construction will not affect aquatic habitats
upstream of the proposed bridge. The relative footprint of the piles is extremely
small within the context of the downstream section of the Oreti River, and its
flow volumes. As discussed in Paragraph 11 above, it will be difficult to avoid
releasing some sediment into the water column when the piles are driven into
the river bed. This impact, however, will be temporary, and with the high
volumes of water moving down the river, any sediment will most likely quickly
dissipate rather than settle on the river substrate. Higher rates of dissipation
would be expected in summer, when river volumes and flow velocities are
generally at higher levels than during the winter.
Timing of works in relation to trout spawning (Submission 3)
44. Brown trout spawn in autumn-early winter. Construction of the proposed bridge
and any other in-stream works is to be timed to avoid trout spawning.
Impact of increased people on fish behaviour and health (Submission 3)
45. Cyclists that do not leave the trail will not have any effects on trout. It is
possible, however, that people will swim in the river during warmer months and
this has the potential to ‘spook’ resident trout. In this regard, potential
interaction with anglers is almost inevitable. It is extremely unlikely, however,
that there will be any impacts on fish health or numbers.
© 2015
11
3467a
Surface run-off (Submission 115)
46. Submitter 115 raises a concern about run-off from the proposed cycle path and
potential effects on the Oreti River. The submitter suggests that “almost
9,000,000 litres of additional instant surface water run-off” could be generated
based on 109 mm of rain falling within a 24-hour period. The submitter also
claims that “given the high amount of fine materials proposed to build the
track’s surface, huge amounts of fine sediments will be washed into streams,
wetlands and into the WCO-protected Oreti River”.
47. I have evaluated the proposed trail alignment (Version 9, 30 July 20141) in
relation to the Oreti River and its feeder streams, and it seems that, for the
most part, the trail is at least 150 m from the river.
In terms of overland
sediment transport, this is a considerable setback, much wider than ‘standard’
riparian protection zones. Rough grassland and tussockland on the flat
floodplain will provide more than enough buffering to intercept and filter and any
sediments washing off the trail. It is also unlikely that the trail will actually yield
any significant amounts of sediment as the surface will be compacted.
Furthermore, certain sections of the trail that pass through land owned by
Landcorp and LINZ (e.g. Three Kings and Windy Hill; Maps 28 to 31) are on
elevated terrain to the west of the river, well beyond the floodplain, and thus will
not have any influence on the river. My opinion supports that of Mr Roy (SDC
Resource Management Planner), who states in his report that “any run-off of
sediment from the cycle trail’s compacted surface would be filtered out by the
existing vegetation before entering waterways and measures can be imposed
via conditions of consent to mitigate effects on water quality and aquatic
ecology” (SDC 2014).
Run-off from spraying of weeds along the cycle trail (Submission 99)
48. I do not know the details of the weed-spraying regime proposed for use along
the cycle trail, but as discussed in Paragraph 33 above, most of the trail is a
significant distance from the Oreti River and its associated tributaries.
1
Proposed route downloaded from the Southland District Council website:
http://southlanddc.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Appendix-2-Oreti-Route-Maps-and-Plans.pdf
© 2015
12
3467a
Contractors would need to follow best practice guidelines when using
herbicides; for example, spraying would only take place on fine days with little
or no wind. Most herbicides are rain-safe after two hours. Taking into account
the amount of floodplain vegetation separating the trail from the river and other
watercourses, it would be virtually impossible for any herbicide to leach into
them.
Spread of didymo (Submission 7)
49. Southland’s four major river systems - Aparima, Mataura, Oreti, and Waiau - all
contain didymo, even though didymo is not always evident. Given that the Oreti
River is subject to more frequent ‘flashy’ high flows and tends to have smaller
stones and gravels than rivers such as the Waiau and Mararoa, the river bed is
more likely to be frequently turned over, resulting in didymo growths being
displaced (Environment Southland 2014b).
50. Cyclists cannot spread didymo unless they have been cycling or walking
through waterways infested with didymo, i.e. across river/stream beds and
through water. Activities such as kayaking, jet-boating, and fishing are far more
likely to spread didymo than cycling. At any rate, cyclists intending to use the
trail must be made aware of the risks of spreading didymo. Signage should be
erected (and maintained) to clearly indicate the risks of didymo transfer. Risks
can be minimised if cyclists stay on the trail, clean their bikes beforehand, and
ensure that their bikes do not make contact with the Oreti River and associated
watercourses.
REVIEW OF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF CONSENT
51. I consider the proposed conditions of consent to be consistent with the
recommendations outlined in my evidence (Paragraphs 28 to 34). As a
precaution, however, I recommend amending the last point in the Land Use
Consent (Bridge) Condition 10 to read as follows: “to avoid the spread of
Didymosphenia geminata or any other pest plant, do not use machinery in the
berm, bed or channel of the river that has been used in any area where pest
organisms and/or pest plants are known to be present in the previous
20 working days, unless it has been thoroughly cleansed and dried”.
© 2015
13
3467a
52. I also recommend adding a condition that states: “all vehicles and machinery
used in the construction phase should be cleaned/water-blasted prior to being
taken to the site, to avoid the introduction of environmental pest plants. In
addition, all materials brought to the site should be of an approved type and
from an approved weed-free source”.
CONCLUSIONS
53. Construction of the bridge will require nine timber piles to be driven into the
river bed. It is acknowledged that these works could potentially result in injury
to, or mortality of, some aquatic fauna, although the effects will be restricted to
the works footprint and will be no more than minor. Any sediment released
during the drilling will rapidly dissipate in the water column.
54. Provided that best practice construction techniques are utilised, it is expected
that construction of the proposed bridge will have some minor temporary
adverse effects, but there will be no long-term adverse effects on the river and
adjacent terraces, subject to the following conditions:
 All vehicles and machinery used in construction are to be water-blasted prior
to use at the site, to avoid the potential introduction of environmental pest
plants.
 All materials (e.g. gravel) brought onto the site are to be of an approved type
and from an approved weed-free source.
 Post-work inspections of the works sites are to be carried out as part of an
overall programme that monitors pest plant incursions along recentlyconstructed sections of the cycle trail.
 All vehicles and machinery are to avoid undercut river banks and other
unstable ground. Such sites are to be clearly marked during the construction
phase.
 Wherever possible, the proposed trail should utilise habitats that are already
modified, such as existing tracks and exotic grassland.
© 2015
14
3467a
 All timbers to be used in the construction of the bridge and boardwalk are to
be treated and placed in a covered area to dry for at least two months prior
to installation.
 Every precaution is to be taken to avoid disturbing birds nesting in the river
bed, including ceasing construction until any threatened birds that are
nesting within 300 m of the site have moved on, and/or undertaking
construction outside of the bird breeding season.
55. The proposed boardwalk at Ashton Flats-North will avoid encroachment into the
wetland by utilising an existing four-wheel drive track. As long as vehicles and
machinery avoid the wetland vegetation, and appropriate weed hygiene
measures are implemented, the effects of the boardwalk are considered to be
no more than minor.
56. I have responded to the issues raised in the submissions, and each of the
issues raised, where relevant, can either be avoided or mitigated so that effects
will be no more than minor.
Dated at Invercargill this 22th day of January 2015
Nicholas Goldwater
Senior Ecologist
© 2015
15
3467a
REFERENCES
Barlow P. and Prew C. 2005: The effect of chrome copper arsenic treated posts on
soil chemistry and biology in kiwifruit orchards. New Zealand Soil News 53(2):
38-45.
Clothier B.E., Green S.R., Vogeler I., Greven M.M., Agnew R., van den Dijssel C.W.,
Neal S., Robinson B.H., and Davidson P. 2006: CCA transport in soil from
treated-timber posts: pattern dynamics from the local to regional scale.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions: 2037-2061.
Comfort M. 1993: Environmental and occupational health aspects of using CCA
treated timber for walking track construction in the Tasmanian Wilderness
World Heritage Area. Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of
Environment and Land Management, Hobart.
Environment Southland 2010: Regional Water Plan for Southland (amended in
accordance with Council and Environment Court decisions).
Environment Southland 2014a: Report under Section 42A of the RMA for hearing of
a Resource Consent Application. Hearing of Southland District Council - APP20147269.
Environment
Southland
2014b:
Online
newsletter
downloaded
http://www.es.govt.nz/media/9228/didymo-es-aemr-08-09.pdf.
from
Frame Group Ltd 2014: Around the Mountains Cycleway Timber and Steel Beam
Bridges: Technical Specifications. Prepared for Southland District Council.
Health and Safety Executive (HSE) 2001: Evaluation on: Review of copper chrome
arsenic: use as an industrial wood preservative. York: Pesticides Safety
Directorate, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Heather B. and Robertson H. 1996: The Field Guide to the Birds of New Zealand.
Penguin Books Ltd. 440 pp.
Hedley M.D. 1997: An assessment of risks associated with use of CCA-treated
timber in sensitive environments and options for its substitution with alternative
timber materials. Conservation Advisory Science Notes No. 154, Department of
Conservation, Wellington.
Health and Safety Executive 2001: Evaluation on: Review of copper chrome
arsenic: use as an industrial wood preservative. York: Pesticides Safety
Directorate, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, June 2001.
Vogeler I., Bolan N., Clothier B., Green S., and Kennedy J. 2007: Mobility of copper,
chromium and arsenic from treated timber into grapevines. Science of the
Total Environment 388: 35-42.
McLellan R.K. 2008: Ecology and management of Southland’s black-billed gulls.
University of Otago, unpublished thesis.
© 2015
16
3467a
MWH 2011: Round the mountain cycle trail: terrestrial ecology report. Prepared for
Southland District Council.
NIWA 2007: Ecological studies of Didymosphenia geminata in New Zealand, 20062007. NIWA Client Report: CHC2007-070 December 2007. NIWA Project:
MAF07507.
Rance B. 1998: Ashton Flats - botanical report. Technical Report. Department of
Conservation, Invercargill.
Read D. 2003: Report on copper, chromium and arsenic (CCA) treated timber.
Prepared for ERMA New Zealand.
Robertson H.A., Dowding J.E., Elliot G.P., Hitchmough R.A., Miskelly C.M.,
O’Donnell C.F.J. Powlesland R.G., Sagar P.M., Scofield R.P., and Taylor G.A.
2013: Conservation status of New Zealand birds. New Zealand Threat
Classification Series 4. Department of Conservation, Wellington. 22 pp.
Southland District Council 2014: Report to Joint Hearing Commissioner Mr Denis
Nugent re: SDC’s application for land use consent to construct, use and
maintain the Upper Oreti Section of the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail.
Vogeler I., Green S.R., Greven M.M., Robinson, B.H., van den Dijssel C., and
Clothier B. 2005: Environmental risk assessment of CCA leaching from treated
vineyard posts. HortResearch Client Report 17659. Prepared for Marlborough
District Council. 48 pp.
Warner J.E. and Solomon K.R. 1990: Acidity as a factor in leaching of copper,
chromium, and arsenic from CCA-treated dimension lumber. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 9: 1331-1337.
Weis J.S. and Weis P. 1995: Effects of chromated copper arsenate (CCA) pressuretreated wood in the aquatic environment. Ambio 24(5): 269-274.
© 2015
17
3467a