EPA Report: Verified Source: Pestlink Operational Report for Common name placeholder, Possum, Ship rat Control in the Central Coromandel Papakai

29 Sep 2017 - 18 Oct 2017 18/04/2018 Department of Conservation Contents 1. Operation Summary

Operation Name Common name placeholder, Possum, Ship rat Control in Central Coromandel Papakai Operation Date 29 Sep 2017 - 18 Oct 2017 District Whitianga Region: Hauraki--Taranaki Pestlink 1718WHT04 Reference Treatment Area Central Coromandel Papakai Size (ha) 11045.00 Conservation Unit Name(s) GA Id(s) 246 Conservation Area 2793085

Treatment Block Details Treatment Blocks Size (ha) Grid Ref GIS Ref Central Coromandel Papakai 11045.00 BA35

Contractor Name Heli Resources 2012 LTD

Treatment Dates Start Completion Central Coromandel Papakai 29 Sep 2017 18 Oct 2017

Target Pest Details Target Treatment Blocks Control Method Name Pests Central Coromandel Possum, Pesticide Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Central Papakai Ship rat, Coromandel Papakai-(2) Common name placeholder

Conservation Outcome(s) To preserve the health and integrity of the forest plant communities within the Papakai ecological area and Manaia Kauri Sanctuary Result Target(s) Treatment Area/Block What we got • RTC 2% Central Coromandel Papakai RTC 0.13 %

Outcome Targets What we got • No set target

2. Introduction

2.1 TREATMENT AREA

Non-target species Common Name Scientific Name Cattle Bos taurus Sheep Ovis aries Dog Canis familiaris

Target benefit species Common Name Scientific Name Kohekohe Dysoxylum spectabile Five finger Pseudopanax arboreus Melicytus ramiflorus subsp. Mahoe ramiflorus New Zealand pigeon, Kereru Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae Pied Tit Petroica macrocephala toitoi Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae Tui novaeseelandiae Bellbird, korimako Anthornis melanura melanura North Island brown kiwi Apteryx mantelli

Threatened species Common Name Scientific Name North Island kaka, bush parrot, Nestor meridionalis septentrionalis brown parrot, kawkaw Hochstetter's Frog Leiopelma hochstetteri North Island brown kiwi Apteryx mantelli Archey's Frog Leiopelma archeyi

Geographical location The Central Coromandel Papakai is situated 11 km SE of Coromandel.

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 2 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018

TREATMENT BLOCK DETAILS: Treatment block Central Coromandel Papakai The Papakai ecological area contains a number of different systems in the one area. The kauri sanctuary is the largest remaining stand of kauri on the and is home to Tanenui, the third largest kauri left standing in New Zealand. The kauri sanctuary has an international Vegetation type classification (IUCN 1). The large number of big kauri dominate the landscape, surrounded by podocarp/hardwood forests that have large mature stands of miro, rimu and rata, amongst kohekohe and tawa. King fern is present in some areas. Bioclimatic zone semi-coastal lowland sub-alpine Climate characteristics: Rainfall 1800 mm Temperature: Average Summer 20.0 Average Winter 13.0 Snow level 0 m Altitude 30-822 m Public access into the area is limited as access is mostly through private land and there are no maintained tracks open to the public. However, there is a closed track from the Tapu- Road to the peak of Maumaupaki and another track with greatly restricted public access maintained for pest control at Te Mata. Main visitor attractions (Kauri Community and Iwi Grove, ) are outside the operational area, but parking is interests alongside the boundary. Where access is possible pig hunting is very popular. Parts of the area are under treaty claim, having great significance to Iwi, including historic pa sites and Waahi Tapu. The mountain tops, such as Maumaupaki as well as being a scenic attraction are significant to local iwi. There are a number of old pa sites in the area that are not recorded. This is a significant area to local iwi, the following is a brief description of the history. Manaia was gifted by Ngati Maru to Ngati Pukenga in recognition of assistance rendered by that Bay of Plenty tribe during the “musket wars“. This is one of the few large Maori owned areas in Hauraki. Manaia is the largest Maori community on the peninsula north of Thames. The Historic sites people are of Ngati Pukenga, Ngati Whanaunga and Ngati Maru tribes. The marae is Te Kou o Rehua. Manaia was a rich resource area: “Ko Manaia, he pataka kai” (Manaia the food store). Fishing and mussel farming employ locals. Mangrove extension and siltation are problems in Manaia Harbour, as in most other estuarine harbours of the peninsula. The Manaia Forest Sanctuary, which contains 400 kauri trees, was established in 1972 after local protest against planned logging.

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 3 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018

2.2 MANAGEMENT HISTORY Management history was not chosen to be shown in this operational report. This history is, however, available via Pestlink 3 Outcomes and Targets 3.1 CONSERVATION OUTCOMES To preserve the health and integrity of the forest plant communities within the Papakai ecological area and Manaia Kauri Sanctuary 3.2 TARGETS 3.2.1 Result Targets The result targets for the treatment area were: • RTC 2%

3.2.2 Outcome Targets The outcome targets for the treatment area were: • No set target

4 Consultation, Consents & Notifications 4.1 CONSULTATION The planning phase began in May 2012 with a review of the operational boundaries to identify adjoining properties. The EW Landowner database was then used to gather contact details of landowners. Ultimately around 50 properties, either adjoining, or included within the boundaries, were idnetified as being potentially affected by the proposed operation.

A maildrop was carried out and a media release to inform all residences in the general area of the pending operation including details of the methods, and proposed timing. Consultation also included educational facilities, medical and veterinary services, other interest groups, and face to face meetings with concerned iwi groups. As a result of this a number of water intakes did have exclustion zones put around them, bait and carcass monitoring was conducted, and dog muzzels supplied to farmers working on the boundary to the treatment area.

A meeting was held at Manaia to provide that community with an opportunity to have input into the operation and to express their views, this was not recieved well and was halted after 1.5 hours due to a number of people in the community and personal threats.

A communications plan was prepared to define objectives, and to ensure that subsequent consultation with landowners was consistent. Communication was undertaken using the following methods: telephone contact, mailouts, media release, letter box drops and face-to-face meetings. Adjoining and affected landowners generally supported the operation during the consultation phase and were satisfied with the amount and detail of information provided; however local opponents of 1080 waged an aggressive campaign of intimidation in the lead up to the operation taking place

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 4 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018

which resulted in a last minute withdrawal of ground work in support of the aerial operation in the mania/Goldfield area.

Consultation outcomes Most of the iwi groups and and adjoining land owners were happy with the level of consultation and the information provided even if they didnt support the aerial drop. Some members of the community at Manaia expressed disapproval of the ground methods proposed to be used in the Goldfields block. As a result this area was excluded from any control at all. Lessons learned Consultation must be followed up by ongoing relationship ‘maintenance’ in the lead up to operations to counter adverse reaction from opponents trying to undermine the operation. Iwi should be asked to come onboard during the planning phase of the operation to ensure a better result during the consultation phase. The earlier Iwi can be contacted regarding these operations in this area the better, due to the nature of the split of small tribes in the area. We hope this may be sorted after the treaty settlement process. 4.2 CONSENTS Consent Consent date File Reference Permission ID DOC Consent 14/09/2107 doc-cm 3149414 17-3466-CM-WAPH-DOC- Public Health 13/09/2017 doc-cm 3165365 Moehau-Aerial

Lessons learned All Doc Permissions the Public Health consent need to be completed well before the operation start date. As the three operational area on the Coromandel Peninsula were to be carried out at the same time, there was some delay in waiting for other areas to complete their consent process . 4.3 NOTIFICATION

All affected landowners identified in the communication plan developed during the planning phase were provided with 24 hours notice prior to the operation commencing.

Notice was given by telephone to all affected parties .

In addition to affected landowners various other interested parties such as police, medical and veterinary services, community groups, recreational groups and educational institutions were notified the operation was commencing. The Medical Officer of Health was also notified prior to commencement.

An advertisment was placed in the local newspaper (Hauraki Herald) stating the operation was about to commence and included a map of the operational boundary. Papakai Communication Plan doc-cm 2973639

Lessons learned Having two staff assisting with the 24hr notification made this task a lot quicker and a lot less pressure on the operational lead

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 5 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018

5 Methods 5.1 TARGET SPECIES

Treatment Block Central Coromandel Papakai Control method Name Target pest species Pesticide - Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Central Possum Coromandel Papakai-(2) Ship rat Common name placeholder

Control Target Pest Treatment Block Name Method Species Central Coromandel Papakai Pesticide - Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Central Possum Coromandel Papakai-(2) Ship rat Common name placeholder 0.15% 1080 Trade name of pesticide Pellets #7 Sodium Name of pesticide fluoroacetat e Type of bait Cereal pellet Toxic loading 1.5 g/kg Not Bait quality sampling Conducted Bait Details Pre-feed Toxic Bait type Cereal pellet Cereal pellet Lure/ mask/ deterrent Cinnamon Cinnamon Lure/ mask/ deterrent 0.10% 0.30% Dye Green Green Individual Bait Weight 6.0g 12.0g

Sowing Rate Details Pre-feed

Date Rate(kg/ha) Wind Speed Direction

29/09/2017 1.50 Light SW

Toxic Date Rate(kg/ha) Wind Speed Direction

18/10/2017 2.00 Light SW

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 6 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018

Time between pre-feed and toxic 19 End of Caution Period Date 18/04/2018 Aircraft type Iroquois Squirrel AS 350 Number of Aircraft 2 Sowing gear details Description Capacity Calibrated under slung bait buckets 1200 kg

Type of navigational guidance Trac Map Pro system used

Bulk bags lifted into loading Loading Method hopper and loaded into helicopter bucket

Complaints and Incidents There was a large number of complaints from the anti 1080 groups on the Coromandel. Whitianga Office received 57 OIA and Ministerial related to the operation and on the day before the operation when loading the bait at the Whitianga work shop a group of anti 1080 protesters arrived at the site to protest the loading and at this locating a protester assaulted on of the security personnel. On the day of the operation there was also large group of protester at the security gate 1 km from the operation loading site. if it was not for the eight security Staff and two Police staff at the gate the loading site would have been over run by the protesters. Other Details about this method - Deviations from planned operation - Lessons Learned -

5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 5.2.1 Effects on Non-Target Species Based on the few studies of native species, and the large number of non-native species studied, information suggests 1080 is likely to be toxic to most animals. Monitoring of native species carried out to date indicates substantial benefits to threatened populations in sites treated with 1080. Performance standard(s) Followed ? Monitored ? Performance Standards for pesticide uses # 1 Yes No

Effectiveness of performance standards No reports of issues regarding the performance standards have been received.

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 7 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018

Bykill of non-target species No reports of any non target species be poisoned have been received to date 5.2.2 Effects on Soil and Water Quality No water monitoring undertaken for this operation - not required by the Public Health permission. Used water test results from previous operation to reassure district council. Performance standard(s) Followed ? Monitored ? Water sampling was carried out in the Kaimaramara Stream at the loading site and 500 metres down stream from the loading site and also at the water intake for the Whitianga water supply. Also water sampling was Yes Yes carried out at the Riverlee School, their water supply was out side the operational area Flight path for helicopter designed to minimise risk of bait spilling into Yes Yes catchments that fed water supplies

Effectiveness of performance standards Water sampling was not a performance standard but was carried out to prove to the general public on the Coromandel1080 in water was not a issues. Veolia Water carried out the sampling and no 1080 was detected in all the samples taken No spills of bait occurred and a review of flight lines showed the helicopter did not go outside prescribed flight lines or apply of bait outside the operational area. 5.2.3 Effects on Ecosystems Effects on Ecosystem Not Applicable Effects on Ecosystems Not Applicable 5.2.4 Effects on Human Health Effects on human health were managed by following Public Health Permisson conditions, Safe Handling of Pesticides SOP, and Performance Standards. Health Protection Officer, Chris Montgomery did not attend any of the operations on the Coromandel Performance standard(s) Followed ? Monitored ? Performance Standards for pesticide uses # 1 Yes Yes

Effectiveness of performance standards No Issues raised 6 Monitoring Results and Outcomes 6.1 RESULT MONITORING - TARGET SPECIES Result target(s) RTC 2%

6.1.1 Target Species Monitoring Trapping Method: Species monitored Possum - Trichosurus vulpecula in Central Coromandel Papakai Monitor method details A contractor was contracted to carry out a trap catch monitor of the Papakai Block. 26 lines of 10 traps pre line for three fine nights for total trap nights of

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 8 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018

750 trap nights. In which only one possum was caught.

Deviations There was no change in method from the AEE or operation Plan Target pest result details Pre During/Post Monitoring dates 02/02/2017 19/12/2107 Results RTC 5.3% RTC 0.13 %

Result target met? Yes Lessons Learned No lesson learnt, only that it is getting harder to find contractors to carry out possum monitoring in big block with limited access

6.2 RESULT MONITORING - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 6.2.1 Non Target Species No monitoring of non target species was undertaken. 6.2.2 Soil and Water Quality Monitoring of: Water sampling was carried out in four location Monitor Method details Water samples were taken from the Kaimaramara Stream at the loading site and 500 metres down stream from the loading site and at the Whitianga Water supply intake 24 hrs. after the toxic bait was applied. A second lot of sampling was carried out 48 hrs. after the toxic bait was applied, at the Whitianga water supply intake and at the Riverlee school on the 309 road both intake were not within the operational area. Another sample was taken at the Riverlee school 2 months after the toxic bait Deviations To start with we were not going to carry out water sampling. but because of the concerns from the Whitianga residents and the parents of children at the Riverlee School we carried out the sampling just to give us more information the next operation and to prove that 1080 in water was not a issues. Monitoring dates First sample 19/10/2017 Second sample 20/10/2017 Third sample 17/12/2107 Results All results came back negative 0.00005 mg/L Lessons Learned Now we have carried out water sampling at these sites we will be carrying them out again for the next operation. we now have the proof for these areas to confirm that 1080 in water is not a issue. Monitoring of: No soil Monitoring was carried Monitor Method details Nil Deviations Nil Monitoring dates Nil Results Nil Lessons Learned Nil

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 9 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018

Monitoring of: No montioring Carried out Monitor Method details Nil Deviations Nil Monitoring dates NIL Results Nil Lessons Learned Nil

6.2.3 Ecosystems No monitoring of ecosystems was undertaken. 6.2.4 Human Health Monitoring of: No human health monitoring was carried out Monitor Method details Nil Deviations Nil Monitoring dates Nil Results Nil Lessons Learned Nil

6.3 OUTCOME MONITORING Outcome targets No set target

No monitoring of outcomes was undertaken

Pestlink Ref: 1718WHT04 Page 10 of 10 Date Printed: 18 Apr 2018