Welcome to the Recover newsletter Issue 2 from the Marine Ecology Research Group (MERG) at the University of Canterbury. Recover is designed to keep you updated on our MBIE funded earthquake recovery project called RECOVER (Reef Ecology, Coastal Values & Earthquake Recovery). This second issue profiles some of the recent work done by our team out in the field!
Welcome to the Recover newsletter Issue 6 from the Marine Ecology Research Group (MERG) of the University of Canterbury. Recover is designed to keep you updated on our MBIE-funded earthquake recovery project called RECOVER (Reef Ecology, Coastal Values & Earthquake Recovery). This 6th instalment features the ‘new land’ created by the earthquake uplift of the coastline, recreational uses of beaches in Marlborough, and pāua survey work and hatchery projects with our partners in Kaikōura.
Welcome to the first Recover newsletter from the Marine Ecology Research Group (MERG) at the University of Canterbury. Recover is designed to keep you updated on our MBIE funded earthquake recovery project called RECOVER (Reef Ecology, Coastal Values & Ecosystem Recovery). This first issue provides a summary of some of the big changes we’ve seen. In the next issue we’ll be profiling some of the current research as well as ways you can get involved!
Welcome to the Recover issue 3 newsletter from the Marine Ecology Research Group (MERG) at the University of Canterbury. Recover is designed to keep you updated on our MBIE funded earthquake recovery project called RECOVER (Reef Ecology, Coastal Values & Earthquake Recovery). In this third instalment we are looking into recent paua, whitebait, and … work our team has undertaken.
Welcome to the Recover newsletter Issue 4 from the Marine Ecology Research Group (MERG) of the University of Canterbury. Recover is designed to keep you updated on our MBIE-funded earthquake recovery project called RECOVER (Reef Ecology, Coastal Values & Earthquake Recovery). This 4th instalment covers recent work on seaweed recovery in the subtidal zone, ecological engineering in Waikoau / Lyell Creek, and a sneak preview of drone survey results!
Welcome to the Recover newsletter Issue 5 from the Marine Ecology Research Group (MERG) of the University of Canterbury. Recover is designed to keep you updated on our MBIE-funded earthquake recovery project called RECOVER (Reef Ecology, Coastal Values & Earthquake Recovery). This 5th instalment covers the question of how much of the coast uplifted how much, recent lab work on seaweed responses to stressors, and more on our drone survey work to quantify earthquake impacts and recovery along 130 km of coastline in the intertidal zone!
Mechanistic and scientific approaches to resilience assume that there is a “tipping point” at which a system can no longer absorb adversity; after this point, it is liable to collapse. Some of these perspectives, particularly those stemming from ecology and psychology, recognise that individuals and communities cannot be perpetually resilient without limits. While the resilience paradigm has been imported into the social sciences, the limits to resilience have often been disregarded. This leads to an overestimation of “human resourcefulness” within the resilience paradigm. In policy discourse, practice, and research, resilience seems to be treated as a “limitless” and human quality in which individuals and communities can effectively cope with any hazard at any time, for as long as they want and with any people. We critique these assumptions with reference to the recovery case in Ōtautahi Christchurch, Aotearoa New Zealand following the 2010-11 Canterbury earthquake sequence. We discuss the limits to resilience and reconceptualise resilience thinking for disaster risk reduction and sustainable recovery and development.
©2019. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved. Earthquakes have been inferred to induce hydrological changes in aquifers on the basis of either changes to well water-levels or tidal behavior, but the relationship between these changes remains unclear. Here, changes in tidal behavior and water-levels are quantified using a hydrological network monitoring gravel aquifers in Canterbury, New Zealand, in response to nine earthquakes (of magnitudes M w 5.4 to 7.8) that occurred between 2008 and 2015. Of the 161 wells analyzed, only 35 contain water-level fluctuations associated with “Earth + Ocean” (7) or “Ocean” (28) tides. Permeability reduction manifest as changes in tidal behavior and increased water-levels in the near field of the Canterbury earthquake sequence of 2010–2011 support the hypothesis of shear-induced consolidation. However, tidal behavior and water-level changes rarely occurred simultaneously (~2%). Water-level changes that occurred with no change in tidal behavior reequilibrated at a new postseismic level more quickly (on timescales of ~50 min) than when a change in tidal behavior occurred (~240 min to 10 days). Water-level changes were more than likely to occur above a peak dynamic stress of ~50 kPa and were more than likely to not occur below ~10 kPa. The minimum peak dynamic stress required for a tidal behavior change to occur was ~0.2 to 100 kPa.
Following the Canterbury earthquake sequence of 2010-11, a large and contiguous tract of vacated ‘red zoned’ land lies alongside the lower Ōtākaro / Avon River and is known as the Avon-Ōtākaro Red Zone (AORZ). This is the second report in the Ecological Regeneration Options (ERO) project that addresses future land uses in the AORZ. The purpose of this report is to present results from an assessment of restoration opportunities conducted in April 2017. The objectives of the assessment were to identify potential benefits of ecological restoration activities across both land and water systems in the AORZ and characterise the key options for their implementation. The focus of this report is not to provide specific advice on the methods for achieving specific restoration endpoints per se. This will vary at different sites and scales with a large number of combinations possible. Rather, the emphasis is on providing an overview of the many restoration and regeneration options in their totality across the AORZ. An additional objective is to support their adequate assessment in the identification of optimum land uses and adaptive management practices for the AORZ. Participatory processes may play a useful role in assessment and stakeholder engagement by providing opportunities for social learning and the co-creation of new knowledge. We used a facilitated local knowledge based approach that generated a large quantity of reliable and site specific data in a short period of time. By inviting participation from a wide knowledge-holder network inclusivity is improved in comparison to small-group expert panel approaches. Similar approaches could be applied to other information gathering and assessment needs in the regeneration planning process. Findings from this study represent the most comprehensive set of concepts available to date to address the potential benefits of ecological regeneration in the AORZ. This is a core topic for planning to avoid missed opportunities and opportunity costs. The results identify a wide range of activities that may be applied to generate benefits for Christchurch and beyond, all involving aspects of a potential new ecology in the AORZ. These may be combined at a range of scales to create scenarios, quantify benefits, and explore the potential for synergies between different land use options. A particular challenge is acquiring the information needed within relatively short time frames. Early attention to gathering baseline data, addressing technical knowledge gaps, and developing conceptual frameworks to account for the many spatio-temporal aspects are all key activities that will assist in delivering the best outcomes. Methodologies by which these many facets can be pulled together in quantitative and comparative assessments are the focus of the final report in the ERO series.