1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

1.2 CONDITION

1.3 OVERALL METHODOLOGY

• 1.3.1 Timeframes
• 1.3.2 Social Impact Assessment Team
• 1.3.3 Matters to be Addressed in the Assessment
• 1.3.4 Assessment is to Compare Previous Studies
• 1.3.5 Assessment is to be Applicable to the Mine Extension

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
This report provides the results of monitoring the social environment of the Waihi community and examines issues relating to the extension of Martha Mine by Waihi Gold Company Ltd (WGC).

This Report on the Social Environment was required to be undertaken in accordance with Condition 3.6 of the land use consent granted by the Environment Court in December 19981 for the extension to Martha Mine (refer Condition 3.6 of Environment Court Decision, Appendix A).

1.2 CONDITION 3.6
Condition 3.6 in the Environment Court decision with respect to the land use application reads as follows:

3.6 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The consent holder shall pay the reasonable and actual costs to the Hauraki District Council to monitor and report on the social environment during the term of the consent up to and at the cessation of mining. The monitoring and reporting will be designed (inter alia) accurately to assess the economic and social effects post-cessation and means of avoiding, remedying, or mitigating those of adverse nature. Such means will include the identification of alternative activities to be developed in or about Waihi to assist the well-being of the town and its inhabitants (consistent always with the purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991), and will also include investigation into ways of encouraging their timely implementation.

1.3 OVERALL METHODOLOGY
The overall methodology used in preparing this Report on the Social Environment is founded on the requirements of Condition 3.6, which specifies a number of matters to be addressed. These are for information purposes only (ie they do not form part of the condition).

The methodology applied to this Report on the Social Environment has been directed by all of the matters specified in Condition 3.6. Each matter is considered in turn below.

1.3.1 Timeframes
i) The monitoring and reporting on the social environment shall be carried out 12 months after the grant of the consent, then at 2 yearly intervals, and again on cessation of mining.

This Report on the Social Environment has been undertaken to satisfy the first monitoring and reporting on the social environment required 12 months after the consent was granted. The next report will be carried out in 2002.

1.3.2 Social Impact Assessment Team
ii) The social impact assessment shall be undertaken by a person(s) experienced and qualified in the area of social impact assessment. Such persons(s) to be to the satisfaction of Council.

A team from Worley Consultants Limited were engaged by the Hauraki District Council to undertake the monitoring and reporting on the social environment. The team consisted of the following:

• Ann McLean (Social Scientist)
• Alan Matheson (Senior Planner)
• Gillian Cockerell (Senior Planner)
• AnaMaria d’Aubert (Planner)

Ann McLean has a strong internationally recognised curriculum vitae in social science research. The rest of the team all have social science degrees and training and experience in community survey work.

1.3.3 Matters to be Addressed in the Assessment
iii) The social impact assessment shall address at least the following matters:
1) employment (numbers, type of employment, location of employment)
2) population (numbers, cohort groupings)
3) housing (location, rental vs ownership, standard)
4) education (types of facilities, numbers)
5) health (services available)
6) law and order (total number of crimes, types of crime, numbers of crimes solved)
7) emergency services (fire, civil defence, ambulance)
8) social welfare support( income support, ACC)
9) churches (types, attendance rates, services offered)
10) post and telegraph services
11) commercial services
12) community organisations
13) local attitudes (survey of community issues)
14) community consultation undertaken by the consent holder
15) Complaints received by the consent holder, the manner in which complaints were sought to be resolved and the resolution of those complaints.
This Report on the Social Environment examines all of the above matters. Items 1) – 11) have been examined in Section 3.0 of this report titled ‘Community Profile’. Items 12) – 15) have been examined in Section 4.0 of this report titled ‘Community Attitudes’.

1.3.4 Assessment is to Compare Previous Studies
iv) The first social impact assessment should discuss the social changes in the community between those identified in the Assessment of Social Effects prepared by Julie Mead Rose & Associates (June 1997). Subsequent social impact assessments should build on and develop from each of the previous assessments.

The ‘Community Profile’ part of this Report (Section 3.0) identifies characteristics of the community at present and makes comparisons with those features of the community identified in the work undertaken by Julie Mead Rose & Associates in June 1997.

It should be noted however, that the study area for this Report on the Social Environment does not cover exactly the same area as that covered in the Julie Mead Rose & Associates June 1997 Report2. The difference is explained in the ‘Methodology’ part of this Report (Section 2.0).

1.3.5 Assessment is to be Applicable to the Mine Extension
v) The social impact assessments shall address all social effects and seek to put the social effects that could be directly attributable to the exercising of this consent into the overall social context.

All the work undertaken within this Report on the Social Environment has focused on identifying social effects that could be directly attributable to the exercising of the consent to the mine extension. Special efforts have been made, particularly during the community attitude survey, to ascertain from the community any social effects resulting from the mine extension rather than any social effects that the community may have experienced as a result of the previous 10 years of mining by WGC.

Given that this is the first Report on the Social Environment, it is expected that the work undertaken as part of this assessment is unlikely to identify any significant social effects resulting from the mine extension because:

• Only a short period of time has past since the consent was granted by the Environment Court (refer to note at the bottom of Page 3); and
• Effects currently occurring are primarily associated with construction activities rather than mining activities.

1 Introduction | 2. Methodology | 3. Community Profile | 4. Community Attitudes | 5. Summary | Apppendices

RETURN TO TOP