ERMANZ Report: Verified Source: Pestlink Operational Report for Possum Control in the Anatoki

11 Oct 2009 - 30 Oct 2009 11/03/2010 Department of Conservation Golden Bay Contents

1. Operation Summary...... 2 2. Introduction...... 3 2.1 TREATMENT AREA ...... 3 2.2 MANAGEMENT HISTORY...... 5 3 Outcomes and Targets ...... 6 3.1 CONSERVATION OUTCOMES...... 6 3.2 TARGETS ...... 6 3.2.1 Result Targets...... 6 3.2.2 Outcome Targets...... 6 4 Consultation, Consents & Notifications ...... 6 4.1 CONSULTATION...... 6 4.2 CONSENTS ...... 9 4.3 NOTIFICATION...... 9 5 Methods...... 10 5.1 TARGET ...... 10 5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...... 14 5.2.1 Effects on Non-Target Species ...... 14 5.2.2 Effects on Soil and Water Quality...... 14 5.2.3 Effects on Ecosystems...... 15 5.2.4 Effects on Human Health...... 15 6 Monitoring Results and Outcomes ...... 15 6.1 RESULT MONITORING - TARGET SPECIES ...... 15 6.2 RESULT MONITORING - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS...... 17 6.3 OUTCOME MONITORING ...... 18

Page 2 of 19

1. Operation Summary

Operation Name Possum Control in Anatoki Operation Date 11 Oct 2009 - 30 Oct 2009 Area Office Golden Bay Conservancy: Nelson Marlborough Pestlink Reference 0910GDB03

Treatment Area Size (ha) Anatoki 11129.00 Conservation Unit Name(s) Conservation Unit Number(s) M27001 Treatment Block Details Treatment Blocks Size (ha) Aerial 1080 Non-Prefeed 7131.00 Aerial 1080 Prefeed 3998.00

Contractor Name Beck Helicopters Ltd

Treatment Dates Start Completion Aerial 1080 Non-Prefeed 30 Oct 2009 30 Oct 2009 Aerial 1080 Prefeed 11 Oct 2009 30 Oct 2009 Target Pest Details Treatment Control Target Pests Name Blocks Method Aerial 1080 Pesticide Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Aerial Non-Prefeed 1080 Non-Prefeed-(1) Aerial 1080 Pesticide Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Aerial Prefeed 1080 Prefeed -(2)

Conservation Outcome(s) The primary conservation objective of this sustained operation is to maintain and improve densities of three species of native giant ; Powelliphanta “Anatoki Range”, Powelliphanta hochstetteri anatokiensis , and Powelliphanta superba superba towards viable population densities.

Result Target(s) Treatment Area/Block What we got • To reduce Anatoki Monitoring due 2012 possums to < 1% RTC within the operational area immediately following the

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 3 of 19

operation.

• To achieve < 1% Anatoki 0% +/- 0% tracking index for in tracking tunnels within the prefeed operational area but excluding the partial waterway exclusion zone immediately following the operation

• To achieve a Anatoki Required level of carcass and required level of bait decay decay of caged possum carcasses and baits to enable termination of the operation Caution Period

Outcome Targets What we got • To increase the average density of Monitoring scheduled for Powelliphanta “Anatoki Range”, Powelliphanta January 2011 hochstetteri anatokiensis and Powelliphanta superba superba consistent with recommendations for long term recovery goal target densities

• To achieve a significant increase between years Monitoring scheduled for in the mean longest shoot measurement for all January 2011 monitored plants of Peraxilla tetrapetala.

2. Introduction

2.1 TREATMENT AREA

Non-target species Common Name Scientific Name

Target benefit species

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 4 of 19

Common Name Scientific Name Large land snail Powelliphanta superba superba Powelliphanta hochstetteri Large land snail anatokiensis Snail Powelliphanta "Anatoki Range" Scarlet mistletoe Peraxilla colensoi Red mistletoe, pikirangi, Peraxilla tetrapetala pirirangi, pikiraki, pirita Yellow mistletoe Alepis flavida Pitpat Pittosporum patulum Blue Duck, Whio Hymenolaimus malacorhynchos

Threatened species Common Name Scientific Name Kea Nestor notabilis Western Gallirallus australis australis Kaka Nestor meridionalis meridionalis Great spotted kiwi Apteryx haastii Blue Duck, Whio Hymenolaimus malacorhynchos Bush falcon Falco novaeseelandiae "bush" Kahurangi kohuhu Pittosporum dallii Rock Wren Xenicus gilviventris Melicytus aff. alpinus (i) (CHR - 541569; "Blondin")

Geographical location The Anatoki is situated 10 km SW of Takaka.

TREATMENT BLOCK DETAILS: Treatment block Aerial 1080 Non-Prefeed The area’s vegetation pattern reflects a strong altitudinal gradient between lowland mixed podocarp-beech (red/hard) /broadleaved forest at the river valleys to beech-southern rata and pure mountain beech at higher elevations. Above treeline areas of tussock land and scree rock were excluded from the operational area where possible. The lowland forests are comprised of mixed podocarps, beech and Vegetation type broad-leaved species, especially Dacrydium cupressinum , Prumnopitys taxifolia , Metrosideros robusta and Weinmannia racemosa and Podocarpus totara At higher altitudes Nothofagus menziesii dominates with (Nothofagus solandri var. cliffortioides occurring in pure stands on ridges at higher altitudes. The shrub tier consists of common forest shrub species (e.g. Coprosma spp., Pseudowintera colorata, Leucopogon fasciculatus). Bioclimatic zone sub-montane montane lowland

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 5 of 19

Climate characteristics: Rainfall 4000 mm Temperature: Average Summer 12.0 Average Winter 8.0 Snow level 1200 m Altitude 250 - 1780 m

The operational area is bisected by the Anatoki Forks track leading to the Anatoki Forks hut. The Boulder Lake hut is on the boundary of the area and provides access to the Douglas Range along unmarked high altitude route. Tramping is confined predominately to the summer periods because of the exposed route. Limited deer hunting Community and Iwi occurs in the central Anatoki Valley and treeline areas of the interests surrounding range tops. Access to the operational area is facilitated by 2wd road access to within c. 3.5 km of the operational boundary along the Anatoki Track. Some recreational deer hunting occurs based on access along the Anatoki Forks track and via helicopter access to the tops. No sites of significance for Maori. No known archaeological or historic sites are located within the Historic sites control area.

Treatment block Aerial 1080 Prefeed Lowland mixed podocarp-beech (red/hard) /broadleaved forest Vegetation type dominate the river valleys intergrading to beech-southern rata at higher elevations. Bioclimatic zone sub-montane lowland Climate characteristics: Rainfall 4000 mm Temperature: Average Summer 15.0 Average Winter 8.0 Snow level 1500 m Altitude 250-1200 m

The operational area is bisected by the Anatoki Forks track leading to the Anatoki Forks hut. Tramping is confined predominately to the Community and Iwi summer periods. Access to the operational area is facilitated by 2wd interests road access to within c. 3.5 km of the operational boundary along the Anatoki Track. Some recreational deer hunting occurs based on access along the Anatoki Forks track. No sites of significance for Maori. Gold workings in the mid -Anatoki valley from the mid 1880's. Visible Historic sites trailing mounds and gold workings.

2.2 MANAGEMENT HISTORY

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 6 of 19

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 The primary conservation objective of this sustained operation is to maintain and improve densities of three species of native giant land snail; Powelliphanta “Anatoki Range”, Powelliphanta hochstetteri anatokiensis , and Powelliphanta superba superba towards viable population densities.

3.2 TARGETS 3.2.1 Result Targets The result targets for the treatment area were: • To reduce possums to < 1% RTC within the operational area immediately following the operation.

• To achieve < 1% tracking index for rats in tracking tunnels within the prefeed operational area but excluding the partial waterway exclusion zone immediately following the operation

• To achieve a required level of decay of caged possum carcasses and baits to enable termination of the operation Caution Period

3.2.2 Outcome Targets The outcome targets for the treatment area were: • To increase the average density of Powelliphanta “Anatoki Range”, Powelliphanta hochstetteri anatokiensis and Powelliphanta superba superba consistent with recommendations for long term recovery goal target densities

• To achieve a significant increase between years in the mean longest shoot measurement for all monitored plants of Peraxilla tetrapetala.

4 Consultation, Consents & Notifications 4.1 CONSULTATION Consultation was undertaken throughout a 3-month operational planning phase beginning in 7/5/09.

• Adjoining landowners • Neighbouring landowners

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 7 of 19

• Public Health Service (Office of Medical Officer of Health) • Tasman District Council • DOC (Nelson/Marlborough Conservancy, Research & Development)) • NZDA • Iwi • Fish and Game council • Community interest groups (Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society, Tramping clubs) • Concessionaires

The operational area is surrounded on all sides by Public Conservation Land (Kahurangi National Park).

Group Dates Outcomes 23/07/09 Draft AEE submitted for initial comment. 29/07/09 Statutory AEE submitted as application for Resource Consent. No 29/07/29, 30/8/09. organisations objections or comments to the proposal noted. Resource Consent RM090471 granted 30/8/09. Emails 15/07/09 onward. Draft MOH application provided for comment. Confirmed consultation over water intakes. Confirmed consultation over dairy farm use up to 3km. Statutory 15/07/2009, Agreed on 2 track clearance checks. Agreed on additional organisations - 28/07/2009 advance warning signs at the Cobb. Confirmed that no dairy Medical 11/08/2009 intakes from either major river within 8 km downstream of boundary. VTA permit application submitted 28/07/2009 and granted 11/08/2009 Consultation with DOC Research and Development about possible effects on kea. Support for operation with non- emails 7/05/2009 DOC sowing over subalpine/non forest areas required as part of onwards national research recommendations. No impacts on Forest Adaptive Management study. DOC consent granted 21/09/09 Letter 15/07/2009. Letter and Key Facts Consultation sent. 15/07/2009. Request to contact DOC if any issues/discussion or if further Iwi 04/06/2009 notification desired. No comments or objections received. 0/09/09 Notification letter and Key Facts sheet sent. Initial Letter 7/05/2009 Initial Letter sent with proposal for further discussion of operation. 25/05/09 onwards. Meetings with landowners to discuss the operation. Most landowners supportive of the need for possum control, and variously Initial Letter supportive of aerial 1080 methods. Some communal 7/05/2009 Visits Landowner - landowners particularly expressed a range of opinions from 25/05/09 onwards. adjacent tacit support to objection on welfare and human health 30/09/09 Notification grounds. Four private water supply intakes identified and Letter locations confirmed within the 4 km radius but which lie outside the operational area. Two intakes lie within the proposed LZ to Operational area flight corridor and agreement to fly in transit below the intakes if possible. Agreement to specifically exclude overflight of the entire catchment of one other water intake. The remaining intake 700m from the designated flight corridor and no overflight of the intake catchment planned. Landowner consent obtained Landowners from 3 landowners for overflight of their land and for use of one landowner's land as a 1080 helicopter loading site. All would be notified within 24 hrs of the start of the 1080 operation. 30/09/09 Notification Letter sent

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 8 of 19

21/07/2009. Letter and Key Facts Consultation sent with initial proposal. Landowners identified as being located directly adjacent to the Anatoki and Waingaro Rivers to a distance of 8-10km downstream of the operational boundary. 21/07/2009 onwards. Emphasized that the main likely issue would be accidental Landowner - Letter and meetings. dog poisoning of river borne carcasses. 30/09/09 Notification proximate 30/09/09 NotificationLetter sent. Support of operation received by most Letter landowners. One landowner objected stating contamination of their water supply. However the catchment not included with the Waingaro river and several ranges between and c 6 km from the operation boundary. All would be notified within 24 hrs of the start of the 1080 operation. Conservation Consultation Letter sent requesting comments. No formal 15/07/09, 30/09/09 Interest Group response. 30/09/09 Notification Letter sent Consultation Letter sent requesting comments. Meeting 7/08/09 with NZDA committee members. They restated NZDA policy of opposition to 1080 use but had no further comment Hunting 15/07/09, 30/09/09 on the operation. They understood the steps to reduce the toxic rate to 2 kg and rationale behind prefeed zones.. 30/09/09 Notification Letter sent Consultation Letter sent requesting comments. No formal Recreation 15/07/09, 30/09/09 response. 30/09/09 Notification Letter sent 30/09/09 Notification Letter sent . 24 hrs pre-operation Police 30/09/2009 advisory. Education – 6 30/09/09 Notification 30/09/09 Notification Letter with Key Facts Sheets and schools Letter Operational Map

30/09/09 Notification 30/09/09 Notification Letter with Key Facts Sheets and Medical Letter Operational Map

30/09/09 Notification 30/09/09 Notification Letter with Key Facts Sheets and Animal Care Letter Operational Map 30/09/09 Notification Letter with Key Facts Sheets and Visitor 30/09/09 Notification Operational Map. DOC Important Notice to Visitors issued information Letter 1/10/09. 24 hr pre-operation advisory list

30/09/09 Notification 30/09/09 Notification Letter with Key Facts Sheets and Agriculture Letter Operational Map

30/09/09 Notification 04/06/09 Notification Letter with Key Facts Sheets and Agriculture Letter Operational Map 15/07/09 Consultation Letter sent requesting comments on 15/07/09 possible affects of the operation on their activities. Requested Consultation Letter, if they would like to kept informed of the operation. Several Concessionaire 30/09/09 Notification concessionaires responded with support and requested Letter updates. 30/09/09 Notification Letter sent. 24 hrs pre- operation advisory for 4 operators

Consultation outcomes The proposed operational area was effectively identical to the previous 2004 operation. This alleviated many concerns about the location and effects of the operation on neighbouring landowners. Four private water intakes located on the boundary of KNP were identified as being affected by possible helicopter transit overflight of intakes or catchments. One catchment was excluded from the Loading Zone-Operational Area flight corridor to alleviate accidental spillage

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 9 of 19 concerns. Two intakes were located within the flight corridor and an agreement reached to fly below the intake if possible. A water intake down slope of the flight corridor but not directly within the surface water catchment was avoided by 700m. Due to the relatively large number of properties directly adjacent to the two main rivers draining the area, there was some concern raised about the possibility of dogs being poisoned by river borne poisoned possum carcasses. For this reason, all landowners along the Waingaro and Anatoki Rivers and Waingaro for 8km and 10km downstream respectively of the operational boundary were included in the consultation and notification process. The low sowing rate of 2kg/ha without prefeed was retained throughout the area (higher altitude zones)in recognition of the importance to hunters of the tree-line areas specifically. Liaison with DOC R&D resulted in an operational change to the prefeed pellet weight from 12 gm to 6 gm. This was made to increase the bait encounter opportunity for rats and thereby increase the effectiveness of the prefeed operation on kill and stoat secondary kill. Lessons learned N/A

4.2 CONSENTS Consent Consent date File Reference Permission ID Anatoki 2009 1080 MOH VTA 11/08/2009 MOH application 09/27/ETM/NELPH DOCDM -432396 Anatoki 2009 1080 DOC 21/09/2009 Consent NHT 02 464601 16 825 Anatoki 2009 1080 Resource Consent 30/09/2009 Consent NHT 02 RM090471 16 825

Lessons learned Resource Consent from TDC took 40-50 working days to process. The capacity for TDC to complete applications within the stated timeframe (20 days) is very dependant on TDC workload and allowance for such delays should be considered in planning timeframes 4.3 NOTIFICATION Notification of the final proposal and operational planning was undertaken immediately (30/09/09) following the receipt of all consents. This comprised of letters and Key Facts Sheets sent to 50 landowners and interested parties. Notified parties comprised all parties included in the Consultation process listed above in addition to:

1. Medical and veterinary practitioners 2. Wild animal recovery operators/processors 3. Schools and child care centres 4. Police 5. All information outlets

Public notification was undertaken by advertising the operation in three regional and local newspapers. 24 hr notification of 37 identified critical landowners and interested parties was conducted to specifically inform of the operation.

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 10 of 19

Refer also to: Assessment of Environmental Effects for Possum Control in the Anatoki Operational Area, 2009, Appendix 3 Consultation Record Anatoki, 2009, Communication Plan Anatoki, 2009 MOH Application

Lessons learned Advisory notices at the start of tracks leading into the control area advised track users that the operation was imminent and that the track could be closed at short notice at an unspecified date. These notices were placed immediately before the prefeed operation to inform users of the nature of the baits on the tracks and alleviate any concerns about these pellets being toxic. This was an effective method of notifying the public well in advance in a targeted way. An additional information notice was attached to the standard Warning signs at the operational boundary of the major tracks stating that although the track had been inspected and met MOH consent conditions for opening, baits could still be located on or near the track. It was considered advisable to emphasize to trampers of the possibility of encountering baits as this was not always understood from the presence/text of the Warning signs. Similar signs/notices should be considered at all major track entrances in future operations

5 Methods 5.1 TARGET SPECIES

Treatment Aerial 1080 Non-Prefeed Block Control method Name Target pest species Pesticide - Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Aerial Possum 1080 Non-Prefeed-(1)

Target Pest Treatment Block Control Method Name Species Aerial 1080 Non-Prefeed Pesticide - Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Possum Aerial 1080 Non- Prefeed-(1) Trade name of pesticide 0.15% 1080 Pellets Name of pesticide Sodium fluoroacetate Type of bait Cereal pellet Toxic loading 1.5 g/kg

Bait quality sampling Not Conducted

Bait Details Pre-feed Toxic

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 11 of 19

Bait type - Cereal pellet Lure/mask/deterrent - Cinnamon Lure/mask/deterrent 0% 0.30% Dye - Green Individual Bait Weight - g 12.0g

Sowing Rate Details Pre-feed Toxic Wind Wind Date Rate(kg/ha) Direction Date Rate(kg/ha) Direction Speed Speed 30/10/2009 2.20 Moderate South

End of Caution Period 01/02/2010 Date Aircraft type Iroquois Number of Aircraft 1 Sowing gear details Description Capacity Specialized pellet spreader with independent 1500 kg

spreader motor. 250m swath width at 240m flight lines. Non retractable legs Type of navigational UTS

guidance system used A canvas, rigid-framed loading hopper (sock) suspended by Hiab on the transport truck. Loading Method Baits hand-loaded directly into the hopper suspended adjacent to the truck loading platform with the bait-bag pallets

Complaints and Incidents 1080: A complaint was received at approx. 0830 hrs on 30 Oct from a landowner 5 km from the operational boundary claiming that a helicopter had flown overhead with a1080-filled sowing bucket. On considering the location of this landowner and the time of the incident, it was determined that this observation was of the operation helicopter flying in transit to the LZ from its base with an under-slung auxiliary fuel tank. A group of approximately twelve anti-1080 protesters arrived at the entrance to the helicopter loading area approximately 45 minutes after the operation begun (8.30 am). No attempt was made by any member of this group to enter the loading area which was situated c. 600m from the public road on a private farm paddock. Two Department of Conservation staff members engaged this group until all members of the group had departed by 10.30 am.

Other Details about this method The Treatment Block size (ha) stated above is the effective Operational area size. The Consented Aerial Treatment Block area is 12,997 ha (including the 3998 ha of the Prefeed treatment area) and excludes mapped Subalpine

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 12 of 19

habitat ( 1290 ha) and where excluded at the pilots visual assessment of non- forest habitat

Deviations from planned operation Nil

Lessons Learned Nil

Treatment Aerial 1080 Prefeed Block Control method Name Target pest species Pesticide - Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Aerial Possum 1080 Prefeed -(2)

Target Pest Treatment Block Control Method Name Species Aerial 1080 Prefeed Pesticide - Aerial Pesticide - Aerial in Possum Aerial 1080 Prefeed -(2) Trade name of pesticide 0.15% 1080 Pellets Name of pesticide Sodium fluoroacetate Type of bait Cereal pellet Toxic loading 1.5 g/kg Bait quality sampling Conducted

Bait Details Pre-feed Toxic Bait type Cereal pellet Cereal pellet Lure/mask/deterrent Cinnamon Cinnamon Lure/mask/deterrent 0.15% 0.30% Dye None Green Individual Bait Weight 6.0g 12.0g

Sowing Rate Details Pre-feed Toxic Wind Wind Date Rate(kg/ha) Direction Date Rate(kg/ha) Direction Speed Speed 11/10/2009 1.10 Moderate SW 30/10/2009 2.20 Moderate South

Time between pre-feed and toxic 19 End of Caution Period Date 01/02/2010

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 13 of 19

Aircraft type Iroquois Number of Aircraft 1 Sowing gear details Description Capacity Specialized pellet spreader with independent 1500 kg spreader motor. 250m swath width at 240m

flight lines for 12 gm 1080 pellets . 185m swathe width for 6 gm prefeed pellets. Non retractable legs Type of navigational UTS GPS

guidance system used A canvas, rigid-framed loading hopper (sock) suspended by Hiab on the transport Loading Method truck. Baits hand-loaded directly into the hopper suspended adjacent to the truck loading platform with the bait-bag pallets.

Complaints and Incidents 13/10/09. A member of Rainbow Valley community phoned to complain that prefeed baits were ‘seen” to be sown in their water supply catchment. Helicopter flight printout showed no bait applied within 2.2 km of water intake. The flight path LZ to operational area was not within 750 m of the intake (500m of catchment upper boundary). An offer by DOC to come and inspect the intake catchment for baits was rejected. Complaint also that they were not informed of the prefeed operation although a message was left on the Rainbow Valley Community answer-phone and a member was spoken to directly 24 hrs day prior. 1080: A complaint was received at approx. 0830 hrs on 30 Oct from a landowner 5 km from the operational boundary claiming that a helicopter had flown overhead with a1080 -filled sowing bucket. On considering the location of this landowner and the time of the incident, it was determined that this observation was of the operation helicopter flying in transit to the LZ from its base with an under-slung auxiliary fuel tank. A group of approximately twelve anti-1080 protesters arrived at the entrance to the helicopter loading area approximately 45 minutes after the operation begun (8:00 am). No attempt was made by any member of this group to enter the loading area which was situated c. 600m from the public road on a private farm paddock. Two Department of Conservation staff members engaged this group until all members of the group had departed by 10.30 am.

Other Details about this method The Treatment Block size (ha) stated above is the effective Operational area size The Consented Aerial Prefeed Treatment Block area is part of the 12,997 ha total Treatment Block (including the 3998 ha of the Prefeed treatment area)

Deviations from planned operation

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 14 of 19

6gm prefeed baits were used instead of 12 gm baits as originally planned as a result of recommendations by R&D for more effective rat kill.

Lessons Learned Nil

5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

5.2.1 Effects on Non-Target Species Effects are discussed in detail in Sections 5.3, 5.4 and 5.7of the AEE. Most of the species listed in 2.1 are potentially at risk from the operation, as 1080 is a generalist poison. In addition to these species there is a common range of invertebrates within the operational area. No native amphibians have been found within the area. Performance standards undertaken for this operation will largely avoid risks to non-target species. The only non-native potentially at risk are dogs. As dogs are prohibited in the area, the main concern is poisoning by river borne poisoned possum carcasses. Followed Monitored Performance standard(s) ? ? DOC Performance Standards: 1080 baits used must have a mean weight of more than 6 grams and 95% of baits must have weight not less than Yes Yes 4grams. Resource Consent Condition 5 that 1080 concentration of 1080 in baits Yes Yes should not exceed 0.15 % w/w Resource Consent Condition 5 that application of baits should not Yes Yes exceed 4kg/ha.

5.2.2 Effects on Soil and Water Quality 1080 is metabolised by soil micro-organisms with no significant impacts on micro-invertebrates. Absorption by plants after leaching of 1080 into the soil, with consequent secondary poisoning of herbivores is negligible. 1080 is highly soluble and is biodegraded by aquatic plants and micro- organisms to low contamination levels. Effects are discussed in detail in Section 5.2 and Appendix 2 of the AEE. Refer AEE Section 5.2.1 for mitigation procedures. Followed Monitored Performance standard(s) ? ? The operational area will avoid water bodies as identified by the MOH with an aerial exclusion zone of 50m maintained on both sides of these Yes Yes watercourses No contamination of public water supply Yes Yes Flight paths within the operational area have been selected to avoid Yes Yes flying over water supplies. No baits will be aerially laid within 150m of all mapped water intakes, huts, campgrounds and other facilities with potable water supplies as Yes Yes identified in AEE Section 3.7

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 15 of 19

5.2.3 Effects on Ecosystems Effects are discussed in detail in Section 5.7 of the AEE Effects on Ecosystems Not Applicable 5.2.4 Effects on Human Health Effects are discussed in detail in Section 5.5 of the AEE. Risk of poisoning if baits ingested and/or drinking water contamination of water. Followed Monitored Performance standard(s) ? ? Warning signs will be placed at the all track starts leading to the treatment area and in both Anatoki Forks, Boulder Lake, Adelaide and Yes Yes Lonely Lake huts. Staff handling bait will wear appropriate protective clothing Yes Yes All tracks will be cleared of baits in accordance with all consent Yes Yes conditions

6 Monitoring Results and Outcomes 6.1 RESULT MONITORING - TARGET SPECIES

Result target(s) To reduce possums to < 1% RTC within the operational area immediately following the operation. To achieve < 1% tracking index for rats in tracking tunnels within the prefeed operational area but excluding the partial waterway exclusion zone immediately following the operation To achieve a required level of decay of caged possum carcasses and baits to enable termination of the operation Caution Period 6.1.1 Target Species Monitoring Residual trap-catch index (RTCI) Method: Species monitored Possum - Trichosurus vulpecula in Anatoki Monitor method details Monitoring adhered to NPCA protocols

Deviations Post-op RTC will be deferred until c. 2012 to provide more useful information on recovery rates based on the assumption of the result target success. This monitoring could be more efficently underaken when the recommended rat control is planned.

Target pest result details Pre During/Post Monitoring dates 26/05/09 to 29/05/09 Monitoring due 2012 Results 7.1 +/- 1.9 Monitoring due 2012

Result target met? Monitoring incomplete Lessons Learned Consider using Wax tag technique instead of, or in addition to RTC for future monitoring

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 16 of 19

6.1.2 Target Species Monitoring Tracking tunnels Method: Species monitored Ship rat - Rattus rattus in Anatoki Monitor method details Monitoring adhered to Gillies and

Williams 2009

Deviations Nil

Target pest result details Pre During/Post Monitoring dates 06/10/09 23/11/09 Results 19% +/- 5% 0% +/- 0%

Result target met? Yes Lessons Learned An adjacent non-treatment control site was established at the Waingaro River. Post-operation rat tracking indices in November 2009 and March 2010 were 39% +/- 8% and 32 % +/- 6% respectively. The original design was for all 10 lines of the Anatoki treatment area to be treated as one block. As such the two tunnels on two different lines which indicated rat tracking were within the Anatoki river aerial exclusion corridor. If tunnels within this corridor were included, then the Result Target would not have been met as a whole block (2%). This design clearly showed that waterway exclusion zones compromise the success of rat focussed operations.

6.1.3 Target Species Monitoring Carcass breakdown Method: Species monitored Possum - Trichosurus vulpecula in Anatoki Monitor method details 2 possum carcasses placed in cages at two sites within the operational area immediately after the operation.

Monitoring adhered to DOC Bait and Carcass Breakdown Monitoring Protocol (2008)

Deviations 2 additional cage sites were planned as optional additions at a high altitude site. However due to access constraints within a suitable period after the operation, these additional cages were not established.

Target pest result details Pre During/Post Monitoring dates 1/11/09 1/03/10 Results Required level of carcass and N/A bait decay

Result target met? Yes Lessons Learned Breakdown of baits was initially monitored at monthly intervals but major decay has taken place

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 17 of 19 within the first two months. The period between inspections was therefore extended. In addition all caged bait had disappeared after 6 weeks so further bait monitoring was not required.

6.2 RESULT MONITORING - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 6.2.1 Non Target Species Monitoring of: Non-target native birds Monitor Method details Informal, haphazard search along formal walking tracks through the aerial 1080 operational area as a part of the track clearance programme. Deviations Nil Monitoring dates 30/10/09 to 1/11/09 Results One chaffinch and two blackbirds were located by DOC staff during track inspection. These birds were assumed to have died from poisoning although no residue testing was conducted. Lessons Learned Nil Effectiveness of performance standards Manufacturer (ACP) testing of bait size, hardness and toxic loading conducted and results filed. All complied with standards. No standard protocol on bait distribution/density assessment. Based largely on end operation % cover assessed by visual inspection of GPS screen and GIS mapping printouts and total bait application.

6.2.2 Soil and Water Quality Monitoring of: 1080 residue in water. Monitor Method details Inspection of public water supply intakes for presence of bait within 100m upstream of intake before reconnection of Deviations Nil Monitoring dates 30/10/09 Results No baits detected in water courses upstream of water intakes at both affected huts. Water reconnected after meeting MOH consent conditions. Lessons Learned Nil Effectiveness of performance standards Helicopter inboard GPS and handheld GPS units tracked the transit flight between the LZ and the operational area. All water intakes and exclusion zones were avoided and maintained to meet all consent conditions. No overflights of other public facilities was noted , both by reviewing GPS flight data and by the inspection of the vicinity of huts by DOC staff stationed at affected huts

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 18 of 19

6.2.3 Ecosystems No monitoring of ecosystems was undertaken. 6.2.4 Human Health Monitoring of: Flight path of helicopter Monitor Method details The "as sown" helicopter GPS unit was scrutinized at several points during the operation to check that sensitive boundaries with water supplies, exclusion zones and water supply catchments had been avoided. On-site mapping using GIS support verified and documented flight paths. Handheld GPS units also carried on the helicopter to record transit flight paths for immediate confirmation that water intakes were avoided. Deviations Nil Monitoring dates 30/10/09 Results Visual screen check and secondary mapping showed that the boundaries had been maintained and no overflight of water catchment boundaries had occurred. Lessons Learned Handheld GPS units useful for immediate recognition of any issues where actual helicopter flight tracks are required (e.g. buffers around water intakes outside of the operational area) ) Effectiveness of performance standards All signs erected the day prior to the operation. Tracks cleared to meet MOH consent conditions with baits detected declining from 10.1 baits/km on the first inspection to 1.7 on the effective 3rd inspection. All staff handling bait tested for 1080 contamination. No adverse effects noted.

6.3 OUTCOME MONITORING Outcome targets To increase the average density of Powelliphanta “Anatoki Range”, Powelliphanta hochstetteri anatokiensis and Powelliphanta superba superba consistent with recommendations for long term recovery goal target densities To achieve a significant increase between years in the mean longest shoot measurement for all monitored plants of Peraxilla tetrapetala.

6.3.1 Outcome monitoring : Large land snail - Powelliphanta hochstetteri anatokiensis Large land snail - Powelliphanta superba superba Snail - Powelliphanta "Anatoki Range" Monitoring Method(s) Snail plots (permanent)

Monitoring information due date 30/06/2011 Method details Biennial re-measurement of P. h. anatokiensis in one

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010 Page 19 of 19

500m² and ten 100m² plots at the Anatoki River site and of P. “Anatoki Range” monitored in one 100m² plot Monitoring dates 2011 Outcome Results Monitoring scheduled for January 2011 Outcome target met? Monitoring incomplete Lessons Learned Nil

6.3.2 Outcome monitoring : Red mistletoe, pikirangi, pirirangi, pikiraki, pirita - Peraxilla tetrapetala Yellow mistletoe - Alepis flavida Monitoring Method(s) Foliar browse index (FBI)

Monitoring information due date 30/06/2011 Method details Foliar browse index (FBI) following Best Practise for monitoring mistletoe species (incl Loranthaceous mistletoe Best Practice) Monitoring dates 2011 Outcome Results Monitoring scheduled for January 2011 Outcome target met? Monitoring incomplete Lessons Learned Nil

Pestlink Ref: 0910GDB03 Date Printed: 18 Mar 2010