[u]Have your say [/u] The Government is consulting on a proposal to create a National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity. A draft National Policy Statement was developed by a stakeholder-led Biodiversity Collaborative Group. The Ministry for the Environment and the Department of Conservation have further developed this into the proposed National Policy Statement. A discussion document has been prepared which sets out the policy proposals and their relevant rationales. The discussion document is available on the Ministry for the Environment's website and we recommend you have a copy with you, as well as a copy of the proposed National Policy Statement, to refer to while answering these questions. The form below includes 63 questions under 8 categories. It is not mandatory to answer all the questions. There is a notes box under each question for you to add supplementary comments to. Supporting documents can also be attached at the end of the form. Please fill in the form below, then click Continue to review your submission. At any time you may click Save and Exit so that you can return later.

You must provide either a company name or given name(s)

Introduction section: Overview of the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB) (pgs 10 - 22)
Section A: Recognising te ao Māori and the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (pgs 23 - 30)
Section B: Identifying important biodiversity and taonga (pgs 31 - 41)
Question 10: Territorial authorities will need to identify, map and schedule Significant Natural Areas (SNAs) in partnership with tangata whenua, landowners and communities. What logistical issues do you see with mapping SNAs, and what has been limiting this mapping from happening?
Question 11: Of the following three options, who do you think should be responsible for identifying, mapping and scheduling SNAs? Why?
Question 12: Do you consider the ecological significance criteria in Appendix 1 of the proposed NPSIB appropriate for identifying SNAs? Why/why not?
Question 13: Do you agree with the principles and approaches territorial authorities must consider when identifying and mapping SNAs? (see part 3.8(2) of the proposed NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 14: The NPSIB proposes SNAs are scheduled in a district plan. Which of the following council plans should include SNA schedules? Why?
Question 15: We have proposed a timeframe of five years for the identification and mapping of SNAs and six years for scheduling SNAs in a district plan. Is this reasonable? What do you think is a reasonable timeframe and why?
Question 16: Do you agree with the proposed approach to the identification and management of taonga species and ecosystems? (see Part 3.14 of the proposed NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 17: Part 3.15 of the proposed NPSIB requires regional councils and territorial authorities to work together to identify and manage highly mobile fauna outside of SNAs. Do you agree with this approach? Why/why not?
Question 18: What specific information, support or resources would help you implement the provisions in this section? (Section B)
Section C: Managing adverse effects on biodiversity from activities (pgs 42 - 67)
Question 19: Do you think the proposed NPSIB provides the appropriate level of protection of SNAs? (see Part 3.9 of the proposed NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 20: Do you agree with the use of the effects management hierarchy as proposed to address adverse effects on indigenous biodiversity instead of the outcomes-based approach recommended by the Biodiversity Collaborative Group? Why/why not?
Question 21: Are there any other adverse effects that should be added to Part 1.7(4), to be considered within and outside SNAs? Please explain.
Question 22: Do you agree with the distinction between high- and medium-value SNAs as the way to ensure SNAs are protected while providing for new activities? If no, do you have an alternative suggestion? Please explain
Question 23: Do you agree with the new activities the proposed NPSIB provides for and the parameters within which they are provided for? (See part 3.9(2)-(4) of the proposed NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 24: Do you agree with the proposed definition for nationally significant infrastructure? Why/why not?
Question 25: Do you agree with the proposed approach to managing significant indigenous biodiversity within plantation forests, including that the specific management responses are dealt with in the National Environmental Standards for Plantation Forestry? (see Part 3.10 of the NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 26: Do you agree with managing existing activities and land uses, including pastoral farming, proposed in Part 3.12 of the NPSIB? Why/why not?
Question 27: Does the proposed NPSIB provide the appropriate level of protection for indigenous biodiversity outside SNAs, with enough flexibility to allow other community outcomes to be met? Why/why not?
Question 28: Do you think it is appropriate to consider both biodiversity offsets and biodiversity compensation (instead of considering them sequentially) for managing adverse effects on indigenous biodiversity outside of SNAs? Why/why not?
Question 29: Do you think the proposed NPSIB adequately provides for the development of Māori land? Why/why not?
Question 30: Part 3.5 of the proposed NPSIB requires territorial authorities and regional councils to promote the resilience of indigenous biodiversity to climate change. Do you agree with this provision? Why/why not?
Question 31: Do you think the inclusion of the precautionary approach in the proposed NPSIB is appropriate? (see Part 3.6 of the proposed NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 32: What is your preferred option for managing geothermal ecosystems? Please explain
Question 33: We consider geothermal ecosystems to include geothermally influenced habitat, thermo-tolerant fauna (including microorganisms) and associated indigenous biodiversity. Do you agree? Why/why not?
Question 34: Do you agree with the framework for biodiversity offsets set out in Appendix 3 of the proposed NPSIB? Why/why not?
Question 35: Do you agree with the framework for biodiversity compensation set out in Appendix 4 of the proposed NPSIB? Why/why not? Include an explanation if you consider the limits on the use of biodiversity compensation as set out in the Environment Court decision: Oceana Gold (New Zealand) Limited v Otago Regional Council as a better alternative.
Question 36: What level of residual adverse effect do you think biodiversity offsets and biodiversity compensation should apply to?
Question 37: What specific information, support or resources would help you implement the provisions in this section? (Section C)
Section D: Restoration and enhancement of biodiversity (pgs 68 - 76)
Question 38: The proposed NPSIB promotes the restoration and enhancement of three priority areas: degraded SNAs; areas that provide important connectivity or buffering functions; and wetlands. (See Part 3.16 of the proposed NPSIB). Do you agree with these priorities? Why/why not?
Question 39: Do you see any challenges in wetland protection and management being driven through the Government's Action for Healthy Waterways package while wetland restoration occurs through the NPSIB? Please explain
Question 40: Part 3.17 of the proposed NPSIB requires regional councils to establish a 10 per cent target for urban indigenous vegetation cover and separate indigenous vegetation targets for non-urban areas. Do you agree with this approach? Why/why not?
Question 41: Do you think regional biodiversity strategies should be required under the proposed NPSIB or promoted under the New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy? Please explain
Question 42: Do you agree with the proposed principles for regional biodiversity strategies set out in Appendix 5 of the proposed NPSIB? Why/why not?
Question 43: Do you think the proposed regional biodiversity strategy has a role in promoting other outcomes (eg, predator control or preventing the spread of pests and pathogens)? Please explain
Question 44: Do you agree with the timeframes for initiating and completing the development of a regional biodiversity strategy? (see Part 3.18 of the proposed NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 45: What specific information, support or resources would help you implement the provisions in this section? (Section D)
Section E: Monitoring and implementation (pgs 77 - 88)
Question 46: Do you agree with the requirement for regional councils to develop a monitoring plan for indigenous biodiversity in its region and each of its districts, including requirements for what this monitoring plan should contain? (see Part 3.20 of the proposed NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 47: Part 4.1 requires the Ministry for the Environment to undertake an effectiveness review of the NPSIB. Do you agree with the requirements of this effectiveness review? Why/why not?
Question 48: Do you agree with the proposed additional information requirements within Assessments of Environmental Effects (AEES) for activities that impact on indigenous biodiversity? (see Part 3.19 of the proposed NPSIB) Why/why not?
Question 49: Which option for implementation of the proposed NPSIB do you prefer? Please explain
Question 50: Do you agree with the implementation timeframes in the proposed NPSIB, including the proposed requirement to refresh SNA schedules in plans every two years? Why/why not?
Question 51: Which of the three options to identify and map SNAs on Public Conservation Land (PCL) do you prefer? Please explain
Question 52: What do you think of the approach for identifying and mapping SNAs on other public land that is not public conservation land?
Question 53: Part 3.4 requires local authorities to manage indigenous biodiversity and the effects on it of subdivision, use and development, in an integrated way. Do you agree with this provision? Why/why not?
Question 54: If the proposed NPSIB is implemented, then two pieces of National Direction – the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS) and NPSIB – would apply in the landward-coastal environment. Part 1.6 of the proposed NPSIB states that if there is a conflict between instruments the NZCPS prevails. Do you think the proposals in the NPSIB are clear enough for regional councils and territorials authorities to adequately identify and protect SNAs in the landward coastal environment? Why/why not?
Question 55: The indicative costs and benefits of the proposed NPSIB for landowners, tangata whenua, councils, stakeholders and central government are set out in the Section 32 Report and Cost Benefit Analysis. Do you think these costs and benefits are accurate? Please explain, and provide examples of costs/benefits if these proposals will affect you or your work.
Question 56: Do you think the proposed NPSIB should include a provision on the use of transferable development rights? Why/why not?
Question 57: What specific information, support or resources would help you implement the provisions in this section? (Section E)
Question 58: What support in general would you require to implement the proposed NPSIB? Please detail.
Section F: Statutory frameworks (pgs 89 - 93)
Final Comments & Privacy

Withhold publishing personal details