DOCSLIB.ORG

Are You Interested in Native Plants and Animals? Have Your Say on Our

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Are You Interested in Native Plants and Animals? Have Your Say on Our Are you interested in native plants and animals? Have your say on Our Natural Capital InterestedWellington’s Draftin your Biodiversity local park? Strategy and Action Plan 2014 Consultation closed Friday 6 March 2015 51 submissions recieved No. Name Suburb Organisation Submission Source Page Number 1 allan probert wilton Online 1 2 Bronwen Shepherd Thorndon Online 4 3 Simon Adams Melrose Online 7 4 Suze Keith Kelburn Online 10 Makara Peak Mountain Bike 5 Jamie Stewart Karori Online Park Supporters Inc. 13 6 Jessi Morgan Courtenay Place Morgan Foundation Online 25 7 Wilbur Dovey Wilton Otari Wilton's Bush Trust Online 29 8 Bob Stephens Email 32 9 Paul Ward Newtown Online 38 10 Bill Hester Ngaio Email 44 11 Peter Henderson Khandallah Online 47 Creswick Valley Residents 12 Jennifer Boshier Northland Email Association 50 Greater Wellington Regional 13 Ali Caddy Email Council 56 14 Marc Slade Brooklyn Polhill Restoration Project Online 64 Wellington Mountain Bike 15 Russel Garlick Miramar Online Club Incorporated. 67 Friends of Taputeranga Marine 16 Murray Hosking Epuni Online Reserve Trust 71 17 Raewyn Empson Zealandia Email 78 18 Des Smith Ngaio Bell's track working group Online 82 Wellington Branch of Birds 19 Geoffrey de Lisle RD1 New Zealand (Ornithological Online Society of New Zealand) 85 20 Bev Abbott Wellington Botanical Society Email 90 21 Carol Comber Mt Cook Mobilised Email 117 22 Garth Baker Highbury Brooklyn Trail Builders Email 120 23 Alex James Hokowhitu Online 128 24 Craig Starnes Brooklyn Online 132 Aro Valley Restoration 25 Denis Asher Norway St Online Project/Tanera Gully 135 26 Nicole Miller Haitaitai Wellington Underwater Club Online 138 27 Peter Reimann Ngaio Trelissick Park Group Email 143 Catharine 28 Brooklyn Email Underwood 145 Newtown Residents' 29 cheryl robilliard Newtown Online Association 148 30 Robert Davies Wilton Email 153 Environmental Reference 31 Simon Wright Email Group 155 32 Hadley Fierlinger Kelburn Online 157 33 Graeme Sawyer Johnsonville Online 257 34 Mike Orchard Lyall Bay Online 261 Island Bay Coast Care and Oku 35 Barbara Fill Island Bay Online Reserve Group 267 36 Alison Valentine Highbury Online 270 Karin Mahlfeld and Wellington Community 37 Ngaio Email Natasha Evans Science and Learning Hub 273 38 Martin Payne Brooklyn Friends of Owhiro Stream Email 279 39 Paul Blaschke Wellington Email 284 Forest & Bird Wellington 40 Peter Hunt Email Branch 287 41 Ann McCrone Mt Cook Email 290 42 Frank Cook Mt Cook Online 292 43 Rosamund Averton Mount Victoria Email 295 44 David Meyers Brooklyn Post 298 Peter Enderby 45 Wadestown Post Buxton 301 46 Siobhan Leachman Brooklyn Post 304 Jessmayen 47 Kilbirnie Post Wakefield 306 48 Julia Stace Aro Valley Aro Valley Community Council Post 309 49 Brent Tandy Lambton Quay Department of Conservation Email 312 Chris Horne and 50 Northland Email Barbara Mitcalfe 313 Ngaio Crofton Downs 51 Robin White Ngaio Email Residents Association 322 1 Submitter Details First Name: allan Last Name: probert Street: 10 churchill drive Suburb: wilton City: wellington Country: New Zealand PostCode: 6012 Daytime Phone: 0272414393 eMail: [email protected] Trade competition and adverse effects: I could I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission I am I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that : a. adversely affects the environment, and b. does not relate to the trade competition or the effects of trade competitions. Wishes to be heard: Yes I do NOT wish to speak in support of my submission and ask that the following submission be fully considered. Preferred hearing location: Oral Hearings ­ Our Natural Capital – Wellington’s Draft Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan Hearing Needs: Correspondence to: Submitter Agent Both Submission 1. Overall, do you support or oppose the general direction of Our Natural Capital? Strongly oppose Oppose Neither support nor oppose Support Strongly support Why do you say this? its an important part of Wellington esp. coast line and Miramar peninsula 2. Do you support the Guiding Principles, Goals and Outcomes? Strongly oppose Oppose Neither support nor oppose Support Strongly support 1 1 Why do you say this? 3. Do you think we have identified the biggest issues facing indigenous biodiversity in Wellington? Yes No Your comments additionally pest control should be given greater priority in these areas esp. the Miramar Peninsula and local and regional council need to take greater responsibility esp. in regard to stray cat control. 4. Do you think we have identified the right priorities in order to achieve our desired outcomes for biodiversity in Wellington? Yes No Your comments as per (3) 5. Do you think we have identified the right organisations to partner with to achieve our objectives? Yes No Your comments not all- stray cat control should be developed as a policy ie. as part of current animal control. This could become a contestable function such as Kitten Inn or SPCA 6. Do you think we have the right indicators and targets to measure our performance by? Yes No Your comments 7. Do you agree with our direction for the tiered support for community groups? Yes No Your comments 2 1 8. Is there anything you feel has not been adequately covered by the draft plan? Yes No Your comments as above wrt. stray cat control 9. Do you have additional comments? (please attach additional pages via the 'Supporting Information' tab) Yes No Your comments we have neutered 6500 stray cats and kittens over the last 5 years on behalf of kitten inn. They are outgrowing their facility which is home based. We believe that there should be a microchipping policy put in place for all wellington cats to enable a policy of id and return to complement stray cat capture and removal Attached Documents File Our Natural Capital – Wellington’s Draft Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 3 2 Submitter Details First Name: Bronwen Last Name: Shepherd Street: 29 Ballantrae Place Suburb: Thorndon City: Wellington Country: PostCode: 6011 Mobile: 0212836909 eMail: [email protected] Trade competition and adverse effects: I could I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission I am I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that : a. adversely affects the environment, and b. does not relate to the trade competition or the effects of trade competitions. Wishes to be heard: Yes I do NOT wish to speak in support of my submission and ask that the following submission be fully considered. Preferred hearing location: Oral Hearings ­ Our Natural Capital – Wellington’s Draft Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan Hearing Needs: Correspondence to: Submitter Agent Both Submission 1. Overall, do you support or oppose the general direction of Our Natural Capital? Strongly oppose Oppose Neither support nor oppose Support Strongly support Why do you say this? Goals and outcomes are ambitious but more importantly achievable as Wellington has the community to support and drive with council backing. Good on the council for taking it to proposal stage 2. Do you support the Guiding Principles, Goals and Outcomes? 4 2 Strongly oppose Oppose Neither support nor oppose Support Strongly support Why do you say this? 3. Do you think we have identified the biggest issues facing indigenous biodiversity in Wellington? Yes No Your comments There could be more resource support for existing entities such as zealandia and otari bush particularly regarding issues which need a wellington wide approach - eg replacing pines and pest monitoring and control 4. Do you think we have identified the right priorities in order to achieve our desired outcomes for biodiversity in Wellington? Yes No Your comments 5. Do you think we have identified the right organisations to partner with to achieve our objectives? Yes No Your comments 6. Do you think we have the right indicators and targets to measure our performance by? Yes No Your comments 7. Do you agree with our direction for the tiered support for community groups? Yes No Your comments 5 2 8. Is there anything you feel has not been adequately covered by the draft plan? Yes No Your comments What happens with financial or resource support for zealandia which is really the centre hub of our green space and the source of our expanding biodiversity, community engagement and research. 9. Do you have additional comments? (please attach additional pages via the 'Supporting Information' tab) Yes No Your comments Thank you for responding to wellingtonians desire to become a green capital! Attached Documents File Our Natural Capital – Wellington’s Draft Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 6 3 Submitter Details First Name: Simon Last Name: Adams Organisation: None On behalf of: Myself Street: 1 Manchester Street Suburb: Melrose City: Wellington Country: PostCode: 6023 Daytime Phone: 0277065812 Mobile: 0277065812 eMail: [email protected] Trade competition and adverse effects: I could I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission I am I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that : a. adversely affects the environment, and b. does not relate to the trade competition or the effects of trade competitions. Wishes to be heard: Yes I do NOT wish to speak in support of my submission and ask that the following submission be fully considered. Preferred hearing location: Oral Hearings ­ Our Natural Capital – Wellington’s Draft Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan Hearing Needs: Correspondence to: Submitter Agent Both Submission 1. Overall, do you support or oppose the general direction of Our Natural Capital? Strongly oppose Oppose Neither support nor oppose Support Strongly support Why do you say this? It's generally on the right track 2. Do you support the Guiding Principles, Goals and Outcomes? 7 3 Strongly oppose Oppose Neither support nor oppose Support Strongly support Why do you say this? I have no problem with the ones that are there, but would like to make a suggestion for another one.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Entomology of the Aucklands and Other Islands South of New Zealand: Lepidoptera, Ex­ Cluding Non-Crambine Pyralidae
    Pacific Insects Monograph 27: 55-172 10 November 1971 ENTOMOLOGY OF THE AUCKLANDS AND OTHER ISLANDS SOUTH OF NEW ZEALAND: LEPIDOPTERA, EX­ CLUDING NON-CRAMBINE PYRALIDAE By J. S. Dugdale1 CONTENTS Introduction 55 Acknowledgements 58 Faunal Composition and Relationships 58 Faunal List 59 Key to Families 68 1. Arctiidae 71 2. Carposinidae 73 Coleophoridae 76 Cosmopterygidae 77 3. Crambinae (pt Pyralidae) 77 4. Elachistidae 79 5. Geometridae 89 Hyponomeutidae 115 6. Nepticulidae 115 7. Noctuidae 117 8. Oecophoridae 131 9. Psychidae 137 10. Pterophoridae 145 11. Tineidae... 148 12. Tortricidae 156 References 169 Note 172 Abstract: This paper deals with all Lepidoptera, excluding the non-crambine Pyralidae, of Auckland, Campbell, Antipodes and Snares Is. The native resident fauna of these islands consists of 42 species of which 21 (50%) are endemic, in 27 genera, of which 3 (11%) are endemic, in 12 families. The endemic fauna is characterised by brachyptery (66%), body size under 10 mm (72%) and concealed, or strictly ground- dwelling larval life. All species can be related to mainland forms; there is a distinctive pre-Pleistocene element as well as some instances of possible Pleistocene introductions, as suggested by the presence of pairs of species, one member of which is endemic but fully winged. A graph and tables are given showing the composition of the fauna, its distribution, habits, and presumed derivations. Host plants or host niches are discussed. An additional 7 species are considered to be non-resident waifs. The taxonomic part includes keys to families (applicable only to the subantarctic fauna), and to genera and species.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of a Proposed Significant Natural Area at Mt Iron, Wanaka
    EVALUATION OF A PROPOSED SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREA AT MT IRON, WANAKA R3762 EVALUATION OF A PROPOSED SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREA AT MT IRON, WANAKA Coprosma shrubland on the southwest faces at the Allenby Farms site, Mt Iron. Contract Report No. 3762 March 2017 (Revised and updated) Project Team: Kelvin Lloyd - Report author: vegetation and flora Mandy Tocher - Report author: herpetofauna Brian Patrick - Report author: invertebrates Prepared for: Allenby Farms Ltd P.O. Box 196 Wanaka 9343 DUNEDIN OFFICE: 764 CUMBERLAND STREET, DUNEDIN 9016 Ph 03-477-2096, 03-477-2095 HEAD OFFICE: 99 SALA STREET, P.O. BOX 7137, TE NGAE, ROTORUA Ph 07-343-9017, 07-343-9018; email [email protected], www.wildlands.co.nz CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. SITE CONTEXT 1 3. METHODS 1 4. ECOLOGICAL CONTEXT 4 5. INDIGENOUS VEGETATION AND HABITATS 5 5.1 Kānuka scrub and shrubland 5 5.2 Coprosma scrub and shrubland 6 5.3 Exotic grassland and herbfield 7 5.4 Swale turf 8 5.5 Cushionfield 8 6. FLORA 8 6.1 Species richness 8 6.2 Threatened and At Risk plant species 12 6.3 Pest plants 12 7. BIRDS 13 8. LIZARDS 14 8.1 Overview 14 8.2 “Remove from SNA” zone 14 8.3 Alternate SNA 18 9. INVERTEBRATES 18 9.1 Overview 18 9.2 Mixed Coprosma-dominant shrubland 18 9.3 Kānuka scrub and shrubland 19 9.4 Rock outcrop habitats 19 9.5 Open grassland and turf 19 10. PEST ANIMALS 20 11. ECOLOGICAL VALUES 20 11.1 District Plan (2009) - Section 6c Significance 20 11.2 Proposed District Plan - Section 6c Significance from Policy 33.2.1.9 22 11.3 Significance summary 23 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Invertebrate Fauna Trajectories in Remediation Sites of Winstone Aggregates Hunua Quarry in Auckland
    ISSN: 1179-7738 ISBN: 978-0-86476-417-1 Lincoln University Wildlife Management Report No. 59 Assessing the invertebrate fauna trajectories in remediation sites of Winstone Aggregates Hunua quarry in Auckland by Kate Curtis1, Mike Bowie1, Keith Barber2, Stephane Boyer3 , John Marris4 & Brian Patrick5 1Department of Ecology, Lincoln University, PO Box 85084, Lincoln 7647 2Winstone Aggregates, Hunua Gorge Road, Red Hill 2110, Auckland 3Department of Nature Sciences, Unitec Institute of Technology, PO Box 92025, Auckland 1142. 4Bio-Protection Research Centre, Lincoln University, PO Box 85084, Lincoln 7647. 5Consultant Ecologist, Wildlands, PO Box 33499, Christchurch. Prepared for: Winstone Aggregates April 2016 Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………....................... 2 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4 Results…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8 Discussion……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 31 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37 Recommendations………………………………………………………………………………………. 38 Acknowlegdements……………………………………………………………………………………… 38 References…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 39 Appendix……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 43 1 Abstract This study monitored the invertebrates in restoration plantings in the Winstone Aggregates Hunua Quarry. This was to assess the re-establishment of invertebrates in the restoration planting sites and compare them with unplanted control and mature sites. This study follows on from
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Geometridae: Larentiinae)
    Blackwell Science, LtdOxford, UKAENAustralian Journal of Entomology1326-67562005 Australian Entomological Society 200544257278Original ArticleRevision of ScotocymaO Schmidt Australian Journal of Entomology (2005) 44, 257–278 Revision of Scotocyma Turner (Lepidoptera: Geometridae: Larentiinae) Olga Schmidt Zoologische Staatssammlung München, Münchhausenstraße 21, D-81247, München, Germany. Abstract The Australasian genus Scotocyma Turner is revised, containing the species S. albinotata (Walker), S. legalis (Warren), S. asiatica Holloway, S. scotopepla Prout, stat. n., S. manusensis Prout, stat. n., S. mimula (Warren), stat. n. and S. miscix Prout. Scotocyma euryochra Turner, syn. n., S. idioschema Turner, syn. n., S. ischnophrica Turner, syn. n. and S. transfixa Turner, syn. n. are regarded as synonyms of S. albinotata. Four species are described as new: S. samoensis, sp. n., S. sumatrensis, sp. n., S. rutilimixta, sp. n. and S. longiuncus, sp. n. Lectotypes are designated for S. scotopepla, S. manusensis and S. miscix. All species are illustrated, and keys to species and distribution maps are provided. A phylogenetic analysis was performed to test the monophyly of the genus and to examine distribution patterns of the species. A biogeographical discussion is included. The tribal position of the genus is clarified and relationships to closely related genera are discussed. Key words Australasian region, biogeography, distribution patterns, geometrid moths, Melanesian island arcs, phylogenetics, taxonomy, Xanthorhoini. INTRODUCTION Since Turner (1922), there have been few reviews of the Australasian genera of Larentiinae. Craw (1986, 1987) revised The genus Scotocyma Turner (1904) belongs to the large sub- the New Zealand species of the genera Notoreas Meyrick and family Larentiinae (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). The larentiine Helastia (Guenée). The Australian Anachloris Meyrick and moths have a worldwide distribution, with the highest species Australasian Chaetolopha Warren have been revised recently diversity in temperate regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Navigation Report on New Zealand King Salmon's
    NAVIGATION REPORT ON NEW ZEALAND KING SALMON’S PROPOSAL FOR NEW SALMON FARMS IN THE MARLBOROUGH SOUNDS 29 SEPTEMBER 2011 BY DAVID WALKER CONTENTS PAGE NO. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 INTRODUCTION 3 Current Position 3 History of involvement in Marlborough Sounds 3 Aquaculture 3 Maritime education and training 4 Qualifications 4 Experience on large vessels 5 Key references 5 SCOPE OF REPORT 7 THE MARLBOROUGH SOUNDS FROM A NAVIGATION PERSPECTIVE: 8 Navigation 8 Electronic Navigation 9 Weather 11 Visibility 11 Fog 11 Tides 12 Marine farms 13 NAVIGATION IN QUEEN CHARLOTTE SOUND 13 NAVIGATION IN TORY CHANNEL 14 PELORUS SOUND 16 PORT GORE 17 NAVIGATION AND SALMON FARMS 19 Commercial vessels over 500 gross tonnage within the designated Pilotage Area 19 Commercial small boats 21 Recreational small boats 22 Collisions between vessels and marine farms 23 INTERACTIONS BETWEEN VESSELS AND MARINE FARMS 25 Beneficial effects of the farms on navigational safety 26 NAVIGATIONAL ISSUES RELATING TO THE PROPOSED SITES 26 Waitata Reach 26 Papatua 28 Ngamahau 30 Ruaomoko and Kaitapeha 33 CONDITIONS TO BE IMPOSED 36 Notification to Mariners/Education 36 Buoyage 37 Restricted visibility 37 Lighting 38 Engineering 39 AIS 40 Emergency procedures 41 Executive summary 1. This report was commissioned by The New Zealand NZ King Salmon Company Ltd (NZ King Salmon) and assesses the effects of NZ King Salmon’s proposal for nine new marine farm sites on navigation in the Marlborough Sounds. In summary, my view as an experienced navigator, both within the Marlborough Sounds and elsewhere, is that provided the farms operate under an appropriate set of conditions the farms will have the following effect on navigation: a.
    [Show full text]
  • Penguin Self-Guided Walk
    WCC024 Penguin cover.pART 11/23/05 10:26 AM Page 1 C M Y CM MY CY CMY K Composite PENGUIN SELF GUIDED WALK KARORI CEMETERY HERITAGE TRAIL Thiswalk takes about togo minutes to two hours. Markers direct you round the walk, all the paths are sign posted and the graves are marked with the Penguinwreck marker. The walk startsat the Hale memorial and finishes at the second Penguin memorial in the Roman Catholic section of the cemetery. The WellingtonOty Coundl gratefullyacknowledges the assistance of BruteE Colllns,author of The WTedrO/thePfnguln,Steell! Roberts, Wellington and of RogerSteeleofsteele Roberts. Historical research:Delrdre TWogan, Karorl HistoricalSociety Author. DeirdreTWogan Wellington CityCouncil is a memberof the HeritageTrails Foundation Brochuresfor other Coundl walksare availableat theVIsitor InformationonJce lm Wakefleld Street. You can also visit the WellingtonCity Coundl on-line at www.wellington.gavt.nz (overimage: Penguinleaving Wellington (Zak PhDlDgraph, Hocken LibrillY) Wellington City Council Introduction The wreck of the Penguin on 12 February 1909 with a death toll of 72 was the greatest New Zealand maritime disaster of the 20th century. The ship went down in Cook Strait, only a few kilometres from where the Wahine was wrecked in April 1968, with the loss of 51 lives. Built of iron in 1864, on its Glasgow-Liverpool run the Penguin was reputed to be one of the fastest and most reliable steamers working in the Irish Sea. At the time of the wreck she had served the Union Steam Ship Company for 25 years, most recently on the Lyttelton and Cook Strait run. The Risso’s dolphin known to thousands as Pelorus Jack cavorted round the Penguin’s bows in the early years of the century, but after a collision in 1904 kept its distance — until January 1909 when it suddenly reappeared.
    [Show full text]
  • 12 Schedules Schedules 12 Schedules
    12 Schedules 12 Schedules 12 Schedules 12 Schedules contents Schedule Page number Schedule A: Outstanding water bodies A1-A3 279 Schedule B: Ngā Taonga Nui a Kiwa B 281 Schedule C: Sites with significant mana whenua values C1-C5 294 Schedule D: Statutory Acknowledgements D1-D2 304 Schedule E: Sites with significant historic heritage values E1-E5 333 Schedule F: Ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values F1-F5 352 Schedule G: Principles to be applied when proposing and considering mitigation and G 407 offsetting in relation to biodiversity Schedule H: Contact recreation and Māori customary use H1-H2 410 Schedule I: Important trout fishery rivers and spawning waters I 413 Schedule J: Significant geological features in the coastal marine area J 415 Schedule K: Significant surf breaks K 418 Schedule L: Air quality L1-L2 420 Schedule M: Community drinking water supply abstraction points M1-M2 428 Schedule N: Stormwater management strategy N 431 Schedule O: Plantation forestry harvest plan O 433 Schedule P: Classifying and managing groundwater and surface water connectivity P 434 Schedule Q: Reasonable and efficient use criteria Q 436 Schedule R: Guideline for stepdown allocations R 438 Schedule S: Guideline for measuring and reporting of water takes S 439 Schedule T: Pumping test T 440 Schedule U:Trigger levels for river and stream mouth cutting U 442 PROPOSED NATURAL RESOURCES PLAN FOR THE WELLINGTON REGION (31.07.2015) 278 Schedule A: Outstanding water bodies Schedule A1: Rivers with outstanding indigenous ecosystem
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 TRANSPORT ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
    MARINE OCCURRENCE REPORT 04-203 Coastal passenger and freight ferry Arahura, heavy weather 15 February 2004 incident, Cook Strait TRANSPORT ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION COMMISSION NEW ZEALAND The Transport Accident Investigation Commission is an independent Crown entity established to determine the circumstances and causes of accidents and incidents with a view to avoiding similar occurrences in the future. Accordingly it is inappropriate that reports should be used to assign fault or blame or determine liability, since neither the investigation nor the reporting process has been undertaken for that purpose. The Commission may make recommendations to improve transport safety. The cost of implementing any recommendation must always be balanced against its benefits. Such analysis is a matter for the regulator and the industry. These reports may be reprinted in whole or in part without charge, providing acknowledgement is made to the Transport Accident Investigation Commission. Report 04-203 coastal passenger and freight ferry Arahura heavy weather incident Cook Strait 15 February 2004 Abstract On Sunday 15 February 2004 at about 1655, the coastal passenger and freight ferry Arahura rolled heavily while altering course to enter Wellington Harbour. Damage was sustained to several vehicles on the car and rail decks and to 3 electronic games machines on the passenger decks. Injuries sustained by the passengers were confined to minor scrapes and contusions. Safety issues identified included: • securing of vehicular cargo on car and rail decks • securing of heavy items of equipment in passenger accessible areas In view of the safety actions taken by Tranz Rail Limited and the development of Maritime Rule Part 24B Carriage of cargoes – stowage and securing, and a New Zealand standard for lashing points on road vehicles, no safety recommendations have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • The Last Interglacial Sea-Level Record of Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa)
    The last interglacial sea-level record of Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa) Deirdre D. Ryan1*, Alastair J.H. Clement2, Nathan R. Jankowski3,4, Paolo Stocchi5 1MARUM – Center for Marine Environmental Sciences, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany 5 2School of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand 3 Centre for Archeological Science, School of Earth, Atmospheric and Life Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia 4Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia 10 5NIOZ, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Coastal Systems Department, and Utrecht University, PO Box 59 1790 AB Den Burg (Texel), The Netherlands Correspondence to: Deirdre D. Ryan ([email protected]) Abstract: This paper presents the current state-of-knowledge of the Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa) last interglacial (MIS 5 sensu lato) sea-level record compiled within the framework of the World Atlas of Last Interglacial Shorelines (WALIS) 15 database. Seventy-seven total relative sea-level (RSL) indicators (direct, marine-, and terrestrial-limiting points), commonly in association with marine terraces, were identified from over 120 studies reviewed. Extensive coastal deformation around New Zealand has prompted research focused on active tectonics, which requires less precision than sea-level reconstruction. The range of last interglacial paleo-shoreline elevations are resulted in a significant range of elevation measurements on both the North Island (276.8 ± 10.0 to -94.2 ± 10.6 m amsl) and South Island (173.1165.8 ± 2.0 to -70.0 ± 10.3 m amsl) and 20 prompted the use of RSL indicators tohave been used to estimate rates of vertical land movement; however, indicators in many instances lackk adequate description and age constraint for high-quality RSL indicators.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects of the Dansey Ecological District / by B.H
    SCIENCE & RESEARCH SERIES NO.32 INSECTS OF THE DANSEY ECOLOGICAL DISTRICT by B. H. Patrick Published by Head Office, Department of Conservation, P O Box 10-420, Wellington ISSN 0113-3713 ISBN 0-478-01285-3 © 1991, Department of Conservation National Library of New Zealand Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Patrick, B. H. (Brian H.) Insects of the Dansey ecological district / by B.H. Patrick. Wellington [N.Z.] : Head Office, Dept. of Conservation, c1991. 1 v. (Science & research series, 0113-3713 ; no. 32) ISBN 0-478-01285-3 1. Insects--New Zealand--Kakanui Mountains. 2. Lepidoptera--New Zealand--Kakanui Mountains. 3. Mountain ecology--New Zealand--Kakanui Mountains. I. New Zealand. Dept of Conservation. II. Title. III. Series: Science & research series ; no. 32. 595.7099382 Keywords: Dansey Ecological District, Lepidoptera, Orthoptera, Trichoptera, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, Dictyoptera, Hymenoptera, key sites for conservation, biology, biogeography, new species, insects, 65.02, 65 CONTENTS ABSTRACT 1 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. METHODS 2 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 2 3.1 Rock bluffs and tors 3 3.2 Short tussock grasslands and shrubland 3 3.3 Alpine grassland 4 3.4 Wetlands 4 3.5 Snowbanks 7 3.6 Upland shrubland 7 3.7 High alpine fellfield and herbfield 7 4. NEW DISTRIBUTIONAL RECORDS 8 5. FEATURES OF THE FAUNA 11 6. CONCLUSIONS AND LIST OF KEY SITES 11 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 12 8. REERENCES 13 APPENDIX 1 14 Fig. 1 Map of the Dansey Ecological District of the Kakanui Ecological Region INSECTS OF DANSEY ECOLOGICAL DISTRICT by B. H. Patrick Conservancy Advisory Scientist, Otago Conservancy, Department of Conservation, Box 5244, Dunedin ABSTRACT An insect survey of the Dansey Ecological District in the Kakanui Ecological Region produced 295 species in seven insect orders, with primary attention being paid to Lepidoptera.
    [Show full text]
  • Consequences to Threatened Plants and Insects of Fragmentation of Alluvial Floodplain Podocarp Forests
    TABLE 6. DIRECTION AND PERCENTAGE OF VARIATION EXPLAINED BY SINGLE FACTOR REGRESSIONS ON ORDINATION SCORE ON EACH OF THE FIRST FOUR AXES DCA ORDINATION AXES (AXES 1, 2, 3, AND 4). FACTOR AXIS1 AXIS2 AXIS3 AXIS4 Location East latitude 3.9 0.0 –2.9 20.9 Mataura catchment 0.0 –3.3 –4.2 5.6 Oreti catchment 9.4 9.7 0.0 13.5 Waiau catchment –4.6 0.0 0.0 –22.8 Environment LENZ L3.1a 3.7 –3.4 0.0 0.0 LENZ L3.2a –9.1 –6.1 0.0 0.0 LENZ L5.1b 0.0 0.0 7.0 4.7 LENZ Q4.1D 0.0 5.5 –8.2 –7.3 Habitat Predominant substrate type Silt substrate 0.0 0.0 0.0 –8.6 Gleyed soils 0.0 –15.9 0.0 0.0 Peat substrate –5.5 –4.2 0.0 0.0 Landform Terrace 0.0 0.0 –5.6 0.0 Swamp 0.0 –7.9 0.0 0.0 Levee 0.0 12.8 8.8 0.0 Backswamp 0.0 –11.5 0.0 0.0 Characteristics of the community Tiers Presence of emergent tier 9.5 –17.3 –7.4 0.0 Species in understorey tier –6.8 5.9 0.0 0.0 Presence of subcanopy tier –10.3 0.0 –19.4 0.0 Presence of epiphytes –5.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum height of emergent tier 0.0 –15.4 –5.6 0.0 Minimum height of emergent tier 0.0 –13.2 –5.6 0.0 Maximum height of canopy tier –32.6 11.5 0.0 0.0 Minimum height of canopy tier –31.3 10.4 0.0 0.0 Maximum height of subcanopy tier –27.6 0.0 0.0 –3.8 Minimum height of subcanopy tier –21.2 3.1 0.0 0.0 Maximum height of understorey tier –20.3 0.0 –17.5 –4.0 Minimum height of understorey tier –18.5 0.0 –9.4 –2.9 Tier complexity 0.0 –5.8 –5.4 0.0 Cover Ground cover 7.7 0.0 10.7 0.0 Litter cover –5.6 0.0 –14.4 0.0 Canopy tier cover 3.1 –9.5 0.0 0.0 Ground tier cover –9.9 –4.9 –12.0 –7.2 Richness Species richness 0.0 –15.3
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Status of the New Zealand Lepidoptera
    Conservation status of the New Zealand Lepidoptera SCIENCE FOR CONSERVATION 136 B.H. Patrick and J.S. Dugdale Published by Department of Conservation P.O. Box 10-420 Wellington, New Zealand Science for Conservation presents the results of investigations by DOC staff, and by contracted science providers outside the Department of Conservation. Publications in this series are internally and externally peer reviewed. © January 2000, Department of Conservation ISSN 11732946 ISBN 047821867-2 Patrick, B. H. (Brian H.) Conservation status of the New Zealand Lepidoptera / B.H. Patrick and J.S. Dugdale. Wellington, N.Z. : Dept. of Conservation, 2000. 1 v. ; 30 cm. (Science for conservation, 1173-2946 ; 136). Cataloguing-in-Publication data. - Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0478218672 1. Lepidoptera--New Zealand. I. Dugdale, J. S. II. Title. Series: Science for conservation ; 136. CONTENTS Abstract 5 1. Introduction 6 2. Construction of the list 7 2.1 The modified criteria of Molloy & Davis (1994) 7 2.2 Definitions of the Patrick & Dugdale categories 8 2.3 List format 9 2.4 Unevaluated species 10 3. Results and discussion 11 3.1 Numbers of species at risk 11 3.2 Habitats of the listed Lepidoptera 13 3.3 Need for more information 13 4. Conclusions 15 4.1 Species in urgent need of conservation action 15 5. Recommendations 16 6. Acknowledgements 17 7. References 18 8. Appendix 1. List of Lepidoptera species considered to be at risk 19 Conservation status of the New Zealand Lepidoptera B.H. Patrick and J.S. Dugdale Otago Museum, PO Box 6202, Dunedin, and 4 Montrose Drive, Nelson ABSTRACT The New Zealand moths and butterflies (Lepidoptera), forming New Zealands third largest Order of Insecta, with c.
    [Show full text]