2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 JUNE 2000 STUDY AREA

2.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE

2.3 COMMUNITY ATTITUDES

2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 JUNE 2000 STUDY AREA
The study area for the June 2000 work differs slightly from the study area identified in the Julie Mead Rose & Associates June 1997 Report. Both assessments have considered statistical information relating to the Waihi Ward (inclusive of Waihi Town). However, the difference between the two study areas is as follows (refer Map of Study Area, Appendix B):

• June 1997 Report Study Area includes Waihi Beach and Athenree.
• June 2000 Study Area excludes Waihi Beach and Athenree for the following reasons:
• These areas are not located within the geographical area of the Waihi Ward; were not included in the coverage of Waihi rural delivery services used for the Community Attitude Survey;
• The effects on the social environment from the extended mine are likely to be recognised in the more immediate area around Waihi Town (ie this represents the ‘community of interest’); and
• Other factors are more predominant in determining the changes to the social environment at Waihi Beach and Athenree (e.g. retirement and holiday).

Other features of the June 2000 work that should be noted include:

• Extent of Community Attitude Survey

The geographical area over which the Community Attitude Survey (refer Section 2.3 below) was distributed, is based on the Rural Delivery service of NZ Post (RD 1 and RD 2) out of Waihi.

It extended as far west as Waikino but not Karangahake or Mackaytown and not as far south as Waihi Beach and Athenree. This rural delivery service effectively covered the whole of the Waihi Ward but did not include delivery to the coastal community of Whiritoa north of Waihi (refer to Map of Community Attitude Survey in Appendix B).

• Extent of Census Data

Much of the information within the Julie Mead Rose & Associates June 1997 Report is based on detailed statistical information set out in another report titled ‘Baseline Data’3 . The baseline data report examined in detail statistics from the 1991 Census.

In order to identify changes between the present community profile and that identified in the Julie Mead Rose & Associates June 1997 Report, this Report on the Social Environment considers statistical information from the more recent 1996 Census (eg population statistics).

However, direct comparisons with the 1991 Census are not drawn because information in the 1996 Census is unlikely to reflect any changes that can be directly attributed to the extension of the mine. The mine extension had not started at the time of the 1996 Census. Any trends in the statistics are more likely to reflect other changes in the community (eg central and local government restructuring, business reorganisation).

2.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE
The methodology used to build up a profile of the current Waihi community has been based on the following:

• Assessment of each of the Items 1) –12) listed in Section 1.2.3 above; and
• Comparison of:
  • The information on each item identified in the June 1997 report prepared by Julie Mead Rose & Associates (hereafter referred to as the ‘June 1997 Report’);
  • Information obtained from in-depth interviews with representatives of community groups and agencies held in June 2000 (refer June 2000 Interviews: List of Groups & Agencies and Key Questions Asked, Appendix C);
  • Population statistics from the 1996 Census; and
  • Records on subdivision and building consents held by the Haruaki District Council.

2.3 COMMUNITY ATTITUDES
A "Community Attitude Survey" sent out in June 2000 was used to gain an understanding of the attitudes of the Waihi community towards the mine extension (refer June 2000 Community Attitude Survey, Appendix D).

As explained in Section 2.1 above, the survey was delivered to households in Waihi Township and to the surrounding rural area, including Waikino but not to Waihi Beach or Athenree. Approximately 2500 surveys were delivered and 346 surveys were returned.

Two maps have been produced to illustrate the geographical spread of respondents within Waihi and in the rural area around Waihi (refer Maps Illustrating Geographical Spread of Respondents to the June 2000 Community Attitude Survey, Appendix E).

Virtually all of the responses received were from residents within Waihi itself, and these were relatively evenly distributed throughout the residential areas. Responses received from outside Waihi were from the Waikino/Waitakauri, Golden Valley, Waitawheta and Waimata areas.

The area from which responses were received and the response rate (approximately 10%) are considered to give a representative sample from the wider community of interest. Comparisons between the 1996 Census and the June 2000 responses illustrate how representative the responses are, and they are included in other sections of this report (eg Section 4.1.1 – Household Composition).

The purpose of the Community Attitude Survey is to complement and add to the interviews undertaken with a cross section of the community.

The results of the Community Attitudes Survey are discussed in Section 4.0 of this report.

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

RETURN TO TOP