Report of the Regional Pest Management Committee of the Waikato Regional Council held in the Council Chamber, Environment Waikato (Waikato Regional Council) office, 401 Grey Street, Hamilton East at 1.15pm on Thursday 11 February 2010.

Accepted

Confirmation of Agenda
Agenda Item 1

The motion was put and carried (RPC10/1).

Disclosures of Interest

Agenda Item 2

There were no disclosures of interest

SECTION A: (UNDER DELEGATION FOR THE INFORMATION OF COUNCIL)

Minutes of the Combined North and South Zone Pest Management Subcommittee
Agenda Item 3 (Doc # 1620108
(110 kb, 15 seconds to download, 56k modem))

The motion was put and carried (RPC10/2).

SECTION B: (FOR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL)

Regional Pest Management Strategy Operational Plan for 2010/2011 – Review of Onewhero, Pukekawa and Te Kohanga
Agenda Item 4 (Doc # 1623528
(35 kb, 5 seconds to download, 56k modem))

Biosecurity Operations Manager, P Russell, provided some background to this item.

The possum control budget and operational plan was considered in November 2009 by the Combined Regional Pest Management Advisory Subcommittees and subsequently by the full Regional Pest Management Committee. However, at the 28 January 2010 meeting of the Combined Advisory Subcommittees, staff were asked to provide further information on the reasons for proposing to defer the Onewhero/Pukekawa possum control operation.

Biosecurity Officer, D Hodges, reported this item, presented slides noting the following:

• Currently there are 34,000 hectares of existing Priority Possum Control Areas bordered by 23,000 hectares of uncontrolled land.
• There was a wider community expectation that control was going to happen in North West Waikato.
• When a prioritisation exercise was done for the Priority Possum Control Areas late last year Onewhero, Pukekawa and Te Kohanga came below the threshold that Environment Waikato could fund.
• From the Residual Trap Catch analysis the following conclusions were made:
• Protected Priority Possum Control Areas’ require maintenance control at least half as often as unprotected Priority Possum Control Areas.
• If control achieves below a 5% Residual Trap Catch then maintenance timeframes stretch from annually to at least every second year.
• But, most control operations in the North West Waikato have achieved Residual Trap Catch of lower then 3% therefore maintenance timeframes could stretch to 3 or 4 years.
• The current picture leaves four Priority Possum Control Areas unprotected (Glen Murray, Opuatia, Punga Punga and Port Waikato).
• Analysis suggests they will require three maintenance operations over five years at a cost of $1.2m.
• The cost of control for Pukekawa, Onewhero and Te Kohanga is estimated at $520k.
• the adjacent areas would then only require two maintenance operations over five years at a cost of $800k.
• Maintenance savings in the area are estimated at $400k.
• If Pukekawa, Onewhero and Te Kohanga and Onewhero were to receive control it would mean increasing the Priority Possum Control Area budget by $540k to undertake initial control.

During discussion the following was noted:

The funding threshold for pest management is somewhat arbitrary and based around rates containment. As a result of rigorous annual planning the organisation is looking at a 1.7% rate increase therefore we can fully afford to reinstate some of the previous unfunded and deferred work from the last three years.

If this initial work proceeds, the implications on the ongoing maintenance budget will be a third less then if we leave it how it is now. If we spend the money now we should save money in the long term.

The first principle in the assessment of Priority Possum Control Areas is to maintain what we have already under control. Out of the $1.6m contracted services budget for pest control over $800k goes into maintaining the gains. RTC is a component of the assessments in existing schemes. In terms of RTC thresholds, if they are over 7%, control happens in the next calendar year, if they are below that control can be deferred for a year.

Concern was expressed about increasing the budget by 1% for this particular area.

The Onewhero/Pukekawa area is at the top of the deferred items prioritisation list.

It is possible to undertake control work in the Onewhero/Pukekawa and Te�Kohanga areas in stages.

The Onewhero/Pukekawa and Te Kohanga residents would be happy with a staged approach going forward.

As a staged process, operationally there is the capacity for all of the control work to be undertaken in one year. Certainly there is no issue in breaking these areas down into three operations. In terms of prioritisation Pukekawa would be the operation to begin as it would protect Punga Punga, Opuatia and Glen Murray. The cost of undertaking initial control work at Pukekawa is around $160k-$180k. Te�Kohanga may be more expensive given the terrain.

The motion was put and carried (RPC10/3).
Cr Southgate moved/Cr Fisher seconded

Cr Burdett moved/Cr Buckley seconded
An Amendment

The amendment was put and carried on a show of hands.

The substantive motion

The substantive motion was put and carried (RPC10/3.1).
CJ Dunstan voted against the motion

SECTION A: (UNDER DELEGATION FOR THE INFORMATION OF COUNCIL)

Farm Awareness of Pest Plant Biosecurity
(Agenda Item 5) (Doc # 1620954
(20 kb, 2 seconds to download, 56k modem))

Biosecurity Officer, W Mead reported this item, presented slides noting the following:

To support the programme of increasing awareness of pest plants to farmers Environment Waikato Biosecurity staff have produced a new fact sheet which highlights this issue and outlines what farmers can do to protect their property.

During discussion the following was noted:

It is unlikely that alligator weed in the Aka Aka Otaua area will ever be eradicated.

There are parts of Northland that are infested with alligator weed.

The motion was put and carried (RPC10/4).

Animal Health Board Budget and Work Programme 2010/2011
(Agenda Item 6) (Doc # 1623522
(13 kb, 1 seconds to download, 56k modem))

T Coates, Director of the Animal Health Board introduced himself and other presenters to the Committee.

Funding is an issue facing the Animal Health Board.

P Livingstone, Technical Manager for the Animal Health Board presented slides noting the following:

- Both theory and real life experience support the case that bovine TB can be eradicated from wild animal populations in New Zealand.
- The key to eradication is reducing and maintaining possum populations at very low, even densities.
- This requires possum densities to be held at very low levels. Theoretically at less than 2% Residual Trap Catch for five years and practically, 9 and 10 years for ground and aerial respectively. Immigration is minimised by carrying out possum control over large adjacent areas.
- TB was successfully eradicated from wildlife and cattle/deer from seven defined locations totalling 100,000 hectares since 2000.
- There were two very large aerial possum control operations over the Hokonui Hills in 2004 and Hauhungaroa Range in 2005 that reduced possum control populations to extremely low levels.
- This suggests that we can achieve the low possum densities necessary for TB eradication over large areas of continuous heavy forest.
- A term in the National Pest Management Strategy refers to Proof of Concept.
- The means the Animal Health Board needs to prove to funding stakeholders that TB can be eradicated from possums and other wildlife populations in extensive forest.
- Eradication of TB from wildlife in forested areas is based on holding possum populations at very low even densities (such that an infected possum will not contact another possum) for a minimum period of ten years and being able to prove that TB has been eradicated from the possum and other wild animal populations.
- Eradication options are to be trialled in extensive forest. The purpose of the trial is to identify cost effective control options that provide a similar level of possum, rat and stoat population reduction, reduce the amount of 1080 in the environment and reduce changes of non-target native wildlife deaths.

- The options to be trialled include the standard aerial broadcast of prefeed and 1080 bait 2.5-5kg/ha, aerial low sow prefeed and 1080 bait trickle or cluster baiting 0.25-1kg/ha, mapping possum densities and control using chew tract cards along transects and aerial low slow defined areas of higher possum density, and detecting and local elimination of possums using chew tract cards and undertaking localised possum control when detected.
- To achieve eradication of TB from wild animals in Rangitoto and Northern Hauhungaroa Range, under conventional eradication, this area would need to receive three standard aerial controls five years apart to eradicate TB from the wild animal population.
- In terms of funding the eradication options, to prove eradication by June 2025 the Animal Health Board needs security of vector control funding for the duration of the trial. If there is a lack of certainty of vector control funding for the proof of eradication trial, the Animal Health Board will need to identify another location for the trial where it has greater security of funding. If the proof of eradication trial was not undertaken in the Rangitoto and Hauhungaroa Ranges this would become a containment area. Possum control would only occur along a 3km wide outer buffer into the ranges every 5-8 years and we would expect low grade infection of adjacent herds over time.
- In summary the Animal Health Board expects to demonstrate eradication of TB from wildlife in extensive forest by June 2025. This will involve maintaining possums at a very low density over a minimum of 10 years and surveying wild animals for proof of eradication over 14 years. The total operational costs over five years of trial including wildlife surveillance are expected to be similar to that of standard broadcast aerial 1080 control over the same area. The research component is funded separately. The Animal Health Board needs certainly of future vector control funding to enable it to successfully demonstrate proof of eradication of TB from wild animal populations.

During discussion the following was noted:

In relation to the northern area, there has been 20 years of control happening, at what point does the Animal Health Board do monitoring only as opposed to control work? This comes down to the wild animal surveys, using pigs and deer because finding TB possums is difficult. Feral pigs are captured in areas where there is no TB, transmitters are put on them and they are released and then shot 6-12 months later. They are then used as the detectors for finding TB possums if they are there.

There are two ways to vaccinate – one is to vaccinate possums, the other is to vaccinate cattle and deer.

The West Coast is under containment and has indicated that they may fund more money to have something done and could be used as an alternative.

The funding arrangements have not been defined and there is an opportunity to discuss these as part of the review.

M Hall from the Animal Health Board discussed contributions to the national costs with the Committee. 40% of these national costs are spent outside the region. A further 25% of these costs are spent on research. The remaining 35% is spent on overheads.
Environment Waikato’s contribution is somewhere in the vicinity of $600-$700k per year but the vector programme has not been confirmed for 2010/11

S Millar from the Animal Health Board presented a map outlining the Animal Health Board operations (ground, aerial and surveys) for the 2010/11 within the Waikato Region.

During discussion the following was noted:

The indicative budget for the operations for the 2010/11 year is around $5.5�million.

An input contract is about to commence around the herd breakdown of 1,500-2,000ha in the Whangamarino area.

The motion was put and carried (RPC10/5).

With the consent of the meeting Item 8 was dealt with at this time.

Biosecurity Plant Pest Contractors Report – Waipa, North King Country and East Waikato
(Agenda Item 8) (Doc # 1622674
(13 kb, 1 seconds to download, 56k modem))

H Pene, Plant Pest Officer presented an overview of ragwort and nodding thistle, privet, woolly nightshade and direct control around low incidence pest plants.

Community initiatives around privet occurred in 8 townships and 2 smaller rural areas of which contractors concentrated on 5 of these areas this season.

In Te Aroha there were 158 properties identified with privet.

In Kihikihi 69 properties were identified with privet.

In Te Kuiti 232 properties were identified with pest plants, the majority being privet.

The Kawhia Community Board wants to revitalise the privet Community Initiative. Several meetings were held. 58 properties were identified with privet, 44 private landowners were sent non-programme letters and 22 non compliant letters were sent.

In Paeroa 169 properties were identified with pest plants. 140 private land owners were sent letters.

During discussion it was noted that:

Properties are assessed on a case by case basis to identify if assistance is required in the removal of plant pests.

The motion was put and carried (RPC10/7).

The motion was put and carried (RPC10/7).

Meeting closed at 3.42 pm.

Doc # 1625922