NETWORK EFFECTIVENESS ................................................................................ 11
7.0 GROUND DEFORMATION MONITORING ............................................................... 12
8.0 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................... 18
9.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 18
FIGURES
Figure 2.1 A map of the
............................................................... 12
8.0 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................... 15
9.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 15
FIGURES
Figure 2.1 A map of the seismographs located in Taranaki. .......................................................................... 2
Figure 5.1 A map of all earthquakes located in Taranaki by GeoNet between July 2015
....................................................................................................... 14
8.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 14
FIGURES
Figure 2.1 A map of the seismographs located in Taranaki. .......................................................................... 2
Figure 5.1 A map of all earthquakes located in Taranaki by GeoNet between July 2014 and
June 2015.
14
8.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 14
FIGURES
Figure 2.1 A map of the seismographs located in Taranaki. .......................................................................... 2
Figure 5.1 A map of all earthquakes located in Taranaki by GeoNet between July 2013 and June
2014.
access purposes
Rohe:
Te Atiawa (Statutory Acknowledgement)
Engagement or consultation:
Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa Trust Comment on application received
Inconsistent with Iwi Environment
Management Plan
Application lacks sufficient detail
Consents and Regulatory Committee - Resource Consents Issued Under Delegated Authority and Applications in Progress
24
page
Non-notified authorisations issued by the Taranaki
clearly highlights
there was an urgency to activate the process, then quickly
recommended by Colin McLellan on the 7/1/19. Under
Question 3 of the process “Statutory Acknowledgements
“The Iwi impacted on is not acknowledged, Ngaati Mutunga,
this is in breach of Treaty Principles of “Partnership“,
”Protection of Taaonga” and being accorded the appropriate
rights to the Mana Whenua of this area. No level of
contamination is and ever will be acceptable into these
waterways. These awa present
(spf1), which cuts at specific sequences throughout the genome, and then the
genetic sequence next to these cut sites is barcoded (identifying the individual) and
sequenced. These are then mapped to the stoat genome that has just been released by
A. Veale (Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research).
For the Southland ferrets, we obtained between 24,000 and 100,000 variable markers using
this technique (depending on the filtering parameters). Depending on the application, these
marker sets were then …
not well on the mountain.
� Inform students that they will be compiling a timeline of significant events during
conferences. Pupils will need to take notes or list page numbers as they read to
provide evidence and share with the group.
� Ask students to compile a list, as they read, of the places on the mountain featured in
the story. These can be plotted on a blank map (see appendix)
Ask students to read independently to the end of Chapter 6.
Sun Mon Tues
performance for consent 6621-1 58
List of figures
Figure 1 Aerial location map of sampling sites in relation to Kaponga WWTP 11
Figure 2 Biomonitoring sites in the Kaupokonui River in relation to the Kaponga WWTP discharge with
taxa number, MCI scores and SQMCI scores for each site 15
Figure 3 Aerial location map of sampling sites in relation to Manaia WWTP 21
Figure 4 Map showing sampling sites in relation to Patea WWTP 36
Figure 5 E. coli numbers for lower Patea River at the
industry best practice, and efficient regulation
of new technologies and techniques.
Tighter controls on hard protection structures to manage
coastal natural hazards.
More explicit recognition of sites of significance through
schedules in the Plan that identify and map values.
KEY CHANGES SUGGESTED IN THE
PROPOSED PLAN
The Plan is a ‘statutory document’, which means it is
enforceable in the courts. It sets out policies and rules for
• discharges to water and air in the