APPENDIX SEVEN Ecological Assessment

Assessment of Ecological Values and Ecological Effects of the proposed Porirua Adventure Park development

Paul Blaschke, Blaschke and Rutherford Environmental Consultants Alison Davis, Aristos Consultants For Porirua Adventure Park Limited

May 2018

Acknowledgements Information: David Moss, Dave Allen, Lyn Adams, Angus Hulme-Moir, Philippa Crisp, Sharyn Westlake (GWRC), Ruth Barrett (Porirua Library), Graeme Ussher (RMA Consultants), Frances Forsyth (Wildlands Consultants). Astrid van Meeuwen-Dijkgraaf (Wildlands Consultants) for permission to use information from her earlier assessment.

Caption (front cover): Recovering forest surrounding the old northern water reservoir in Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve. In background is regenerating forest below dead pine and macrocarpa trees and in the distance, regenerating shrubland near the top station of the proposed gondola and trail network. Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 BACKGROUND 1 1.2 PROPOSED WORKS 2

2.0 METHODS 4

2.1 VEGETATION, HABITATS AND FACILITIES SURVEY 4 2.2 FAUNA SURVEY 4

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 6

3.1 CLIMATE 6 3.2 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 6 3.3 MITCHELL STREAM 7 3.4 CONTAMINATED LAND 7 3.5 LAND USE AND COVER 8 3.6 ECOLOGICAL DISTRICT AND LAND ENVIRONMENT 14 3.7 VEGETATION 14 3.8 SIGNIFICANT VEGETATION/NATURAL AREAS 21 3.9 FAUNA HABITATS 21 3.10 BIRDS 21 3.11 LIZARDS 29 3.12 BATS 30 3.13 FRESHWATER FAUNA 30 3.14 SUMMARY OF THREATENED SPECIES AND ECOSYSTEMS 33 3.15 PEST PLANTS 34 3.16 PEST ANIMALS 35 3.17 SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL VALUES 36

4.0 ASSESSMENT OF ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS 37

4.1 CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS 37 4.2 OPERATIONAL EFFECTS 45 4.3 OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS 47

5.0 METHODS TO AVOID, REMEDY OR MITIGATE OR OFFSET POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS 50

5.1 AVOIDANCE MEASURES 50 5.2 REMEDIATION MEASURES 52 5.3 MITIGATION ‘PACKAGE’ 54

REFERENCES 58 APPENDIX 1: VEGETATION AND HABITAT DESCRIPTIONS 61

APPENDIX 2: CALCULATIONS FOR VEGETATION CLEARANCE FOR PROPOSED TRAILS 65

APPENDIX 3: SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF PLANT SPECIES IN TEXT 69

Figure 1: Location of the proposed Porirua Adventure Park, Porirua City. 2 Figure 2: Location of the bird count stations and line transects for the proposed Porirua Adventure Park 5 Figure 3: A time sequence of photos showing the landscape of what is now the Rangituhi/western reserves in Porirua City. 9 Figure 4: 1904 map of the southern Porirua basin 11 Figure 5: Location and extent of vegetation types in the application site. 16 Figure 6: Photos illustrating the various vegetation types within the Porirua Adventure Park application site. 17 Figure 7: Birds detected along line transects within the proposed Porirua Adventure Park application site, February 2018. 25 Figure 8: Birds recorded along the proposed Gondola corridor within the application site, February 2018. 28 Figure 9: Photo of the Wellington green gecko (Naultinus punctatus). 29 Figure 10: Mitchell Stream crossing within the Spicer Botanical Park. 32 Figure 11: Proposed trials to be constructed for the Porirua Adventure Park. 40 Figure 12: Mitigation proposed for Porirua Adventure Park – indicative sites for revegetation and pest animal control 57

Table 1: Vegetation types, and their stature within the application site. 15 Table 2: Bird species observed at the Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve and Te Rahui o Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Parklands, January-February 2018. 23 Table 3: Mean number of individuals of common indigenous bird species per five-minute bird count from a survey undertaken in February 2018within the proposed Porirua Adventure Park site. 24 Table 4: Freshwater fish records from the upper Mitchell Stream and its tributaries, within Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve and Colonial Knob Park, Porirua City 31 Table 5: Recommended methodology to assess level of adverse effects on ecology. 37 Table 6: Vegetation clearance for proposed trail construction by Reserve 38 Table 7: Trail lengths (m) by vegetation type for all reserves 39 Table 8:Summary of the level of ecological effects and proposed responses 48

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background Porirua Adventure Park Limited are seeking the necessary resource consents and Department of Conservation (DOC) and Porirua City Council (PCC) approvals to establish an operative an adventure park being ‘The Porirua Adventure Park’ (Fig. 1). As part of the development, a number of related construction activities are proposed. Under this proposal an integrated group of recreation and tourism activities would be centred on a network of mountain bike and walking trails within DOC and PCC reserve land in the western hills of Porirua City; a short distance southwest of the Porirua CBD. The proposal detail, including all physical works proposed on the site, is covered in detail in Section 5 of the Resource Consent Application. The land parcels that form the ‘application site’ are listed in Section 4 of the Resource Consent Application and illustrated on the accompanying master plan drawings. The various parcels of land are known as Te Rahui o Rangituhi / Colonial Knob Parklands (TRoR) and the Porirua Scenic Reserve (PSR) that are administered by PCC, the Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve (RCKSR) that is administered by the Department of Conservation (‘DOC’), the Spicer Botanical Park that is administered via a joint venture arrangement between Wellington City Council (WCC) and PCC, and the Spicer Landfill that is administered by PCC and Wellington City Council. This assessment of ecological effects has been undertaken under subcontract to Blaschke and Rutherford Environmental Consultants. In this report, the natural features of the application site are described, a detailed description and assessment of the ecological values at the application site undertaken, and potential ecological effects identified. Options are then proposed to avoid, remediate and mitigate adverse effects from the development. In 2014 an earlier unrelated proposal for a network of MTB trails was made to PCC. An assessment of effects including ecological effects was made at that time by Wildland Consultants Ltd (Wildlands 2014). This report draws on the previous assessments in some respects for the purposes of assessing and determining the existing ecological values of the application site only. The two authors of the report are familiar with the site and wider environs, and Paul Blaschke has previously provided ecological advice for mountain bike tracks within the PCC land parcels subject to this application for Porirua City Council.

pg. 1

Figure 1: Location of the proposed Porirua Adventure Park, Porirua City.

1.2 Proposed Works As further described in section 5 of the Resource Consent Application, the proposal includes the following elements: a. The establishment and operation of recreational activity; b. A Base Station compound containing an operations building, café / restaurant, a surf simulator, a demonstration and bike repair centre, toilets, changing rooms, administration and the gondola station and gondola maintenance station; c. A Top Station compound containing a cafe, bathroom facilities, a covered walkway, a helicopter landing area (location TBC) and a service shed; d. A gondola allowing access from the Base Station to the Top Station; e. Downhill mountain bike trails; f. Learning skills areas; g. A collection hub; h. A zipline; i. A carpark located within the Spicer Landfill ‘borrow area’ j. Vehicle access; k. Helicopter access; l. Infrastructure servicing; m. Vegetation clearance; and n. Earthworks and construction works;

pg. 2

Of the most relevance to this report, the proposal includes earthworks and construction associated with the construction of the Base Station and the Top Station, the construction of trails through the three reserve areas (that includes stream crossings), native vegetation removal and works within the bed of the Mitchell Stream.

pg. 3

2.0 Methods The methodology for this review and assessment included both desktop and site work. A wide range of relevant documentation was read, assessed and referenced where appropriate. Unpublished information was obtained from team members, PCC, GWRC and DOC staff, and other colleagues and incorporated into this report as relevant. The bibliography gives a guide to the sources drawn on. A number of pre-application meetings were held with the councils and DOC as further described in Section 6 of the Resource Consent Application. More than six-person days between the two report authors were spent in on-site assessment, over eight visits between December 2017 and April 2018. Some visits were made with other team members and one with PCC staff and peer consultants.

2.1 Vegetation, habitats and facilities survey All vegetation types identified in a previous assessment (Wildlands 2014; see section 3.7 for details) were inspected. Streams, the reservoir areas and the route of all trails were walked including the 20m wide gondola line corridor. The site of all gondola towers and top and bottom station facilities were also inspected.

2.2 Fauna survey Information on fauna habitat and fauna at the application site was gathered from a desktop literature review including of the wider locality, information from people with knowledge on various fauna groups at the site, and from three site visits undertaken on 19 January 2018, 17 February 2018 and 24 February 2018. The site visits focused on assessing the characteristics and quality of habitat for indigenous fauna, and recording birds present within the application site. From the first visit a list was compiled from observations made of bird species present. During the second and third visits a combination of line transects and five-minute bird counts were undertaken to record all birds heard and seen along the gondola corridor and in the area where new or upgraded mountain bike trails are proposed (Fig. 2). Survey methods followed standard protocols established in New Zealand for bird surveys (DOC 2012). These methods provide a structured way of recording all birds present at a site and an estimate of conspicuous or relative density. The methods can potentially be repeated at a future date but for comparisons to be valid repeated counts need to be done at similar times of the year, in similar weather conditions, and ideally the same observer. Field survey was not undertaken for other fauna groups but rather the assessments have relied on observations or records from other people and organisations.

pg. 4

Figure 2: Location of the bird count stations and line transects for the proposed Porirua Adventure Park

pg. 5

3.0 Existing Environment

3.1 Climate The climate of the southern Porirua City is relatively benign in comparison to much of the Wellington region (Chappell 2014), although the application site is slightly wetter and cooler than in central Porirua and within the application site the weather would vary between relatively warm and sheltered in the valley to relatively cooler, wetter and much windier on the upper hills. Average annual rainfall varies between 1000-1100 mm with average monthly rainfall varying between about 50 and 120 mm. The median summer daily maximum temperature is between 18˚ and 20˚, and the median winter daily minimum temperature between 6˚ and 7˚. Median annual sunshine hours are 1900-2000 and there are a rather low number of days (about 40) with a soil moisture deficit. Because the application site is close to the coast and not far from Cook Strait, wind speeds are very high even in relation to other parts of Wellington, with median annual average windspeed of about 8m/second (about 30km/hour) and frequent far stronger gusts at all times of the year.

3.2 Geology and soils The hills of the application site in the Mitchell Stream catchment are composed of alternating bedded hard sandstones (greywacke) and argillite with minor conglomerates, pillow basalts, chert, diamictite and limestone (Begg and Johnston 2000; Begg and Mazengarb 1996). These rocks are the dominant rocks of the Wellington belt of the Torlesse complex of Triassic age and are intensely faulted and folded in a complex ‘melange’ of rock. The Ohariu Fault lies within the bottom of the Spicer Valley and the hills of the application site rise to the west of the fault. On the hill tops there are remnants of an older peneplain (the ‘K surface’) with some remaining areas of loess (windblown silt deposited in the cold periods of the Quaternary age). The presence of loess is significant because it has progressively moved down the hill slopes to form part of the soil parent material. The hill top K surface areas are relatively smooth but small relative to the eroded hill sides, which are naturally mobile because of faulted friable rock and additions of loess. The valley bottoms are narrow. The Mitchell Stream at SBP is about 60 m asl and the reserves rise to 468 m asl at the Rangituhi/Colonial Knob summit. Hills have moderate to steep slopes, generally with a southwest – northeast orientation, with narrow, steep, winding gullies leading into small terraced basins and valley bottoms where cool air collects. The complex topography (smooth ridgetops, fault-induced valleys, gullies, river terraces and broad basins) contributes to patchy frosts, turbulent wind flow and variable incident solar radiation. Soils on the hills in the catchment are mainly Makara series steepland soils on steep to very slopes and Korokoro hill soils on moderately steep to steep slopes. Korokoro soils are classified as Typic Firm Brown soils in the New Zealand Soil Classification, and yellow-brown earths in the NZ Genetic Soil Classification) (Bruce 2000; Heine 1975). The Makara soils are classified as Typic Orthic Brown Soils in the New Zealand Soil Classification, and steepland soils related to yellow-brown earths in the NZ Genetic Soil Classification. Both these soils are formed in the weathered greywacke colluvium of the Wellington belt Torlesse rocks together with minor loess

pg. 6

elements. There are small areas of Ngaio series soils formed on the more rounded hilltops and spurs, which have a greater component of loess as their soil parent material. The Spicer Valley although narrow contains very small areas of recent soils from alluvium. These are Waikanae series (Typic Recent Fluvial soils in the New Zealand Soil Classification), which are free-draining and free from flooding.

3.3 Mitchell Stream Almost all streams in the study area occur in the catchment of Mitchell Stream which flows from the upper catchment in vicinity of Colonial Knob peak, flows down the Mitchell Valley parallel to Broken Hill Road, and joins the Porirua Stream near Kenepuru railway station. Aspects of the stream morphology are controlled by its position relative to the Ohariu Fault. Small parts of the application site within PSR fall within the Urukahika Creek catchment. The largest tributary within RCKSR has been modified by two reservoirs and channelized sections that were put in place as a water supply (see below). Both Porirua Stream and Urukahika Creek discharge into the Onepoto Arm of Porirua Harbour, which is the ultimate receiving environment

3.3.1 Water quality PCC holds four consents issued by GWRC for discharge to the environment for the operation of Spicer Landfill that is nearby to the application site (and the site in which the proposed carpark is located). The discharge consents require monitoring of the leachate generated, along with surface water, and ground water at upstream and downstream locations. Biological monitoring of Mitchell Stream is also conducted at two sites, one upstream of the old reservoir within the RCKSR, and the other within SBP. Annual reports of this monitoring are published, the most recent being for 2016-7 (Tonkin and Taylor 2017).

3.3.2 Hydrology ENGEO Ltd were requested by the applicant to undertake a baseline hydrological assessment at the application site (ENGEO, 2018a). They modelled flood risk to the structures at the base station and concluded that the risk was minimal. This was dependant on a containment bund being built to the southwest of the proposed base station so that a 100-year flood event and upstream dam break would be contained to the floodway area around the existing stream. The construction of the recommended bund now forms part of the proposal. The hydrological assessment has no implications for the ecology at the site.

3.4 Contaminated Land A preliminary site investigation for the presence of contaminants within the application site was undertaken by ENGEO Ltd at the request of the applicant (ENGEO, 2018b). There was evidence of a 1m thick layer of silt fill and bunding around the proposed base station suggesting minor filing and earthworks as the site. ENGEO recommended that testing for contaminants be undertaken before development proceeds. As with the hydrological assessment at this stage here are on implications for the ecology at the site.

pg. 7

3.5 Land use and cover

3.5.1 Historical1 land The application site would have been almost entirely forested in pre-human times, with a cover of podocarp-broadleaved forest. Predominant forest species in the original forest were emergent rimu and northern rata over a canopy of tawa and kohekohe with other important species including rewarewa, pukatea, mamaku, nikau and many smaller broadleaved trees and ferns. See section 3.7 below for more details on forest variation.

The area was occupied by Ngati Toa iwi and portions of the lower slopes and valleys used for gardening. European settlement started in southern Porirua district by the mid nineteenth century, with a prominent early English settler, Anthony Wall, and his family establishing a farm of 100 acres in the vicinity of the current ESR research centre at Kenepuru (Penman and Penman 2015). A review of historical records and photos from published books and from archives held by the Porirua Library indicates a history of extensive timber milling and forest clearance from this time.

The soils of the valleys and lower gentle slopes were seen as fertile by the early settlers. Between the later part of the nineteenth century and the early twentieth century virtually all of what is now the TRoR, most of the RCKSR and much of the PSR were cleared for farming, and most tall timber trees (notably almost all the large rimu, other podocarp species and northern rata) were either felled or heavily damaged by fire (Fig.3). The areas escaping widespread clearance were largely the lower slopes of the major stream valleys and clearly shown in a 1904 map (Fig. 4). This pattern of vegetation modification is seen in the modern vegetation pattern.

1 Much of the information in this section was collated from Porirua Library records including historical photographs and Kapi Mana News archives.

pg. 8

Figure 3: A time sequence of photos showing the landscape of what is now the Rangituhi/western reserves in Porirua City.

Late 1890’s Caption: Heavily logged and disturbed rimu-broadleaved forest on hills of current PSR behind Porirua Hospital, late 1890s, showing dead crowns, fire and wind and logging damage. Photo A7/24, Porirua Library Historical Collection. [WP_20180228_15_28_41]

1930’s

Caption: Forest clearance inside southern boundary of PSR at top right. At top centre are the farmed faces of TRoR and faint traces of forest around Spicer Valley can be seen at top left.1930s. Photo A7/24, Porirua Library Historical Collection. [WP_20180228_15_10 A3_27]

pg. 9

1959

Caption: Looking south over hills between Porirua and Tawa, 1959. Spicer Valley at upper right is still actively farmed. Photo A10/1, Porirua Library Historical Collection. [WP_20180228_15_26 A10_1_1959]

Water Reservoir

Caption: Porirua Hospital water supply northern reservoir, c. 1900. Heavily disturbed standing forest with burnt crowns of tall trees, likely to be rimu, northern rata, pukatea. Photo A7/5, Porirua Library Historical Collection. ]WP_20180228_15_28_41]

pg. 10

Figure 4: 1904 map of the southern Porirua basin This 1904 map of Porirua shows edges of uncleared forest (marked as ‘bush’ to north and southeast of Colonial Knob trig. Part of topographic map of country surrounding the City of Wellington, Wellington Lands and Survey Department 1904. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington. Reproduced from Murray (2006).

pg. 11

Around 1893 a 1-million gallon water reservoir in a lower valley tributary of Mitchell Stream within the current CKSR was established, for the new “Porirua Lunatic Asylum”. An earth dam structure was built to hold the water, this being one of the first earth dams of this scale in New Zealand and now one of only two in the Wellington region.

In 1912 a second reservoir was constructed in the tributary valley to the south of the first reservoir. Although forest around the reservoir structures was felled, and surrounding forest areas significantly disturbed (Fig. 3), by 1912 the catchment area around the two reservoirs included 80 acres of fenced native forest, as well as a further 2-300 acres of “rough hill country” that was used for extensive grazing and would have included regenerating forest (Offer 1997; Walker 1987). These were some of the earliest forest protection measures undertaken in the area. At a later stage grazing was restricted and the first areas of pines were established above the northern side of the first reservoir. Further fencing and pine planting was undertaken in the 1930s (Fig. 3).

When the reservoirs were decommissioned in the 1950s (the southern dam structure has largely disappeared and the reservoir has largely filled with sediment), the remaining bush-covered Crown Land that had been administered by the Hospital was intended to be made into a bush reserve. In 1976 the 80 hectares originally taken in 1894 and subsequently fenced was declared surplus to Porirua Hospital’s requirements with the intention announced to develop it as what became Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve (RCKSR). At the end of 1973 Colonial Knob Walkway had been officially opened and the Scenic Reserve was gazetted in 1994.

Members of the Spicer family had lived and farmed in the area since the 1840s. They farmed at the head of what is now the Spicer Valley and over into the upper Ohariu Valley. Spicer Valley was seen on early aerial photos to be partly cleared in the 1930s. Photos throughout the twentieth century show periodic erosion episodes on farmed areas within the application site, especially within what is now Te Rahui o Rangituhi (TRoR). This area was formerly known as Colonial Knob Farm. It was put up for tender by Landcorp Farming in 1998 and was privately owned between 1999 and 2009. At that time the bulk of the area (109 ha) was purchased by PCC and named Colonial Knob Parklands, then later renamed (2015) as Te Rahui o Rangituhi. Some farming still occurs under lease on upper part of TRoR.

The current Porirua Scenic Reserve (PSR) was from the late 19th century part of a property farmed by the Prosser family. It was milled and burned around that time. Clearance in southern part of PCR, adjoining TRoR, is clearly seen in 20th century photos (likely into the 1930s). The majority of PSR was first set apart as Reserve in 1960 and formally reserved as SR in 1971, vested in PCC. Fires continued in northern part of reserve into the 1970s and some planting of bare areas undertaken from 1979 (Porirua City Council 1994).

From the mid-20th century on, farm grazing has been gradually restricted, although within the present CKP farming was widespread until the land was purchased by Porirua City Council in 2009.

pg. 12

In 1967, some land in Colonial Knob valley was first zoned as industrial in PCC’s district scheme, after having been for many years been farmed by the Lands and Survey Department under the general control of Porirua Hospital. Some of this land became Spicer Landfill, established in 1976 as a joint venture between Porirua City Council and Wellington City Council. Within the lower part of the valley Spicer Botanical Park (SBP) was established from the mid-1980s, accompanied by the establishment of further pine plantations on the lower hills within TRoR to the west of Broken Hill Road.

In the period leading to the present time, vegetation regeneration has continued, and plant and animal pests have increased greatly in abundance, threatening the natural values of the application site, although some control is undertaken (see sections 3.15 and 3.16 below).

3.5.2 Current land uses

The application site currently includes a mosaic of mature lowland forests, regenerating indigenous scrub and low forest, high altitude/cloud shrubland, planted conifer and gum forest, exotic scrub dominated by gorse and blackberry and rank grassland.

Until recently TRoR was farmland grazed by stock. Today the pasture has reverted to rank grassland, with patches of gorse, and scattered wildling pines, Spanish heath and indigenous shrubs. On the steeper slopes and in gullies indigenous scrub is regenerating, often with gorse, blackberry and Spanish heath present. There are significant areas of planted radiata pine, macrocarpa, Tasmanian blackwood, shining gum, and rose gum on the lower slopes of the Parkland, interspersed with extensive patches of blackberry. Indigenous shrubs and ferns are present in the understorey of the planted forests, especially where there are canopy gaps and on the forest edges. Where there are significant areas of gully erosion poplars and willow have been planted.

RCKSR has a mosaic of rank pasture, regenerating scrub and low forest and mature lowland forest. The mature forest is dominated by a kohekohe canopy with rewarewa and tawa also present. Regenerating scrub and forest is dominated by mahoe and rangiora. The ridgetop vegetation is considered to be a cloud forest community, induced partially by fire and partially by the climatic conditions. Kāpuka, koromiko tāranga, and tauhinu), as well as extensive areas of kiekie and patches of astelia are present in remaining low forest and scrub at higher altitudes.

At the SBP vegetation types are dominated by exotic species with a mown grass understorey. In the proposed bottom station area the planted exotic tree species are predominantly Australian eucalyptus, and also some Tasmania blackwood, silver wattle and swamp she-oak. At the forest edge indigenous seedlings and saplings occur in the understorey.

The reserves within which the application site lie provide key ecological linkages within the Porirua and northern Wellington landscapes. Combined, the three reserves form one of the largest semi- continuous wooded tracts on the fringes of urban Wellington and Porirua, including exotic forest plantations and reverting low forest and scrub on former farmland.

pg. 13

It forms a backdrop to Porirua CBD and a buffer between the city and farming areas to the west (Pikarere Farm) and southwest (Ohariu Valley). The area is already an important recreation area and includes part of the Te Araroa long-distance trail.

3.6 Ecological District and Land Environment The application site lies within the Wellington Ecological District (McEwen 1987). Its biophysical environment is classified as Eco-Domain C in the Wellington Eco-domains classification (Boffa Miskell 2002; Gabities 2002) and Land Environment F1 in the Land Environments of New Zealand classification (Leathwick et al. 2003).

3.7 Vegetation The original vegetation cover can broadly be described as podocarp/broadleaf forest, with rimu and northern rata emerging over a broadleaved canopy often dominated by tawa and kohekohe.

This type of forest is classified as MF6 (kohekohe, tawa forest) and MF7 (tawa, kāmahi, podocarp forest) in the classification of New Zealand ecosystems (Singers and Rogers 2014). MF6 is described by Singers and Rogers (2014) as “Podocarp, broadleaved forest of abundant kohekohe and frequent tawa, with occasional tītoki, māhoe, porokaiwhiri and nīkau, and scattered emergent rimu, pukatea and northern rātā.” MF7 is described as “Podocarp, broadleaved forest of abundant tawa and kāmahi of at least three local variants:…2. emergent rimu, miro, kahikatea, mataī, tōtara and northern rātā, and abundant tawa, kāmahi, hīnau, rewarewa and pukatea”. These national-scale descriptions apply well to the original forest remaining in the application site, with the important proviso that as a result of logging and other disturbance, the emergent trees named are locally present mainly in the sub-canopy and lower forest layers rather than being emergent. Also, it appears that kamahi is no longer present at in the Rangituhi/western reserves forests.

The terrestrial vegetation types have been mapped by Wildlands (2014) (Refer to Table 1 below). The 13 vegetation types established by Wildlands (2014) were adopted for the purposes of the current assessment, as was the mapping of their distribution as shown Fig. 5. The vegetation types have been grouped into ‘vegetation structural classes’ reflecting the broad vegetation (i.e. forest, scrub, shrubby vegetation and grassland) and how it relates to the primary forest vegetation (i.e. original, regenerated, replaced).

Details in the description of the vegetation types provided in Wildlands Consultants (2014) have, however, been edited in the descriptions shown in Appendix 1, on the basis of field observations made during this assessment. Changes made in the detailed vegetation descriptions principally account for specifying the descriptions to the current application site rather than the larger area covered by the Wildlands assessment (which included the full area of the PSR). Vascular plant species lists for the whole reserve area are provided by Wildlands (2014) and Enright et al. (2000).

Only two of the 13 mapped vegetation types shown in Table 1 are remnants of the original (primary) vegetation cover, totalling just under 20 ha or 7.5% of the total application site area. A further 88 ha or one third of the area is regenerated indigenous forest, and 34% or 13% is exotic forest. The remainder of the area is scrub, shrubby vegetation and rough pasture grassland (which contains minor indigenous herbs).

pg. 14

The vegetation pattern shown in Fig. 5 shows some clear correlations with the land use history summarised in section 3.4.1, in particular with the bush clearance history. The current areas of tall mixed tawa-kohekohe forest with occasional northern rata podocarp or pukatea emergent trees (types 1 and 2) correlate well with areas that were shown as forest in 1904 (Fig. 4). These are the only vegetation types in Table 1 that are original (uncleared) native forest; all other forest types in Table 1 have regenerated from cleared land or have been planted.

There are very few emergent or canopy podocarps or northern rata in the modern vegetation, but a number of tall broadleaved trees such as tawa, kohekohe, pukatea, and rewarewa, and of podocarps such as miro and totara in the sub-canopy and understorey. All other vegetation is regenerated from cleared or heavily disturbed forest land, of different ages. The number of very large mamaku in the older regenerating vegetation is also notable. Note that vegetation type 3 although noted as similar in overall composition to vegetation type 2, is clearly regenerated (secondary) forest compared to the primary forest of type 3, as shown by the land use history discussed in section 3.4.1. Most planted forest in the application site is pine plantation, established between the 1930s and early 1980s, within TRoT or CKSR. Smaller areas of macrocarpa and eucalypt forest were also established. Spicer Botanical Park, however, was established around the late 1980s, and planted as an arboretum with a wide range of predominantly broadleaved trees from various parts of the world. The most common planted trees in the valley bottom in the vicinity of the bottom station are eucalypts species and Tasmanian blackwood was also commonly planted in this area. Fig. 6 illustrates the vegetation types as the currently appear.

Table 1: Vegetation types, and their stature within the application site.

The vegetation types were taken from Table 1.1 of Wildlands report (2014). Type 13 was renamed to include mown grass in Spicer Park. The area calculations include the additional areas mapped in the south east part of the application site. Veg. Type Vegetation Type Vegetation Structural Class Area (ha) No. 1 Tawa-kohekohe-(podocarp) forest Primary indigenous forest 13.4 2 Tawa-mahoe-(podocarp) forest Primary indigenous forest 78.3 3 Tawa-mahoe forest Secondary indigenous forest 21.5 4 Mahoe-(tawa) forest Secondary indigenous forest 23.5 5 Mahoe forest Secondary indigenous forest 40.3 6 Exotic conifer-dominated forest Exotic forest 24.8 7 Exotic broadleaved-dominated forest Exotic forest 17.5 8 Higher altitude scrub Indigenous shrubby vegetation 34.7 9 Mahoe-gorse scrub Indigenous shrubby vegetation 0.97 10 Gorse scrub Exotic dominated scrub 14.7 11 Exotic scrub Exotic dominated scrub 0.58 12 Indigenous shrubland Indigenous shrubby vegetation 2.1 13 Pasture or Mown grassland Pasture grassland 69.7

pg. 15

Figure 5: Location and extent of vegetation types in the application site.

pg. 16

Figure 6: Photos illustrating the various vegetation types within the Porirua Adventure Park application site.

Caption: Porirua Scenic Reserve from Prosser St, Porirua (right) with grassland, scrub exotic forest in Te Rahui o Rangituhi at top left. Lower stature of forest mahoe-dominated forest (vegetation type 3) on spur close to PSR boundary can be clearly contrasted with taller and more varied forest canopy (vegetation type 2) in gully to right.

Caption: Higher altitude scrub and low forest (vegetation type 8) on upper slopes of Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve. Gorse scrub at near edge.

Caption: Tawa-kohekohe broadleaved forest in vicinity of lower Route 14 trail, Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve

pg. 17

Caption: Mainly mahoe-dominated forest (vegetation type 5) in Rangituhi/ Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve.

Caption: Mainly mahoe-dominated forest with prominent mamaku (vegetation type 5) and dead pine and macrocarpa trees at right, macrocarpa-dominated exotic forest (vegetation type 6) in southern Te Rahui o Rangituhi at left. Proposed gondola crosses valley in middle of scene.

Caption: Te Rahui o Rangituhi / Porirua Scenic Reserve boundary above proposed top station, with tawa-mahoe forest (vegetation type 3) above grassland (vegetation type 13).

pg. 18

Caption: Regenerating mahoe and tawa forest (vegetation type 3) over trail 6 route near Te Rahui o Rangituhi / Porirua Scenic Reserve boundary. Mahoe-gorse scrub (vegetation type 9) in foreground.

Caption: Route of upper part of Trail 14 from upper Te Rahui o Rangituhi / Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve boundary. Vegetation on spur is grassland and shrubland, with higher altitude scrub on upper slopes and mahoe forest on lower slopes.

Caption: Pine and macrocarpa forest in vicinity of gondola tower #6 on Boundary Road.

pg. 19

Caption: Existing Spicer Link track through mahoe Caption: Mahoe forest (vegetation type 5) forest (vegetation type 5) above northern end of under route of bottom of gondola line near

Spicer Botanical Park. southern boundary of Te Rahui o Rangituhi. Gondola construction will necessitate

clearance of some of this forest.

Caption: Gully in northern part of Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve, with

mahoe-dominated forest and tawa more prominent in mid upper slopes. Trail 16 route lies below Farm Road on right.

pg. 20

3.8 Significant vegetation/natural areas The two scenic reserves (CKSR and PSR) together with adjoining areas of private forest land have been described as the most significant area of remaining natural forest in the Porirua Basin (e.g. Blaschke et al. 2009; DOC 2010). An unpublished survey of significant ecological sites in Porirua City placed the PSR in the highest rank of significance, and the RCKSR in the second highest rank. In terms of the criteria for ecological significance set out in Policy 23 of the Wellington Regional Policy Statement (GWRC 2016), both reserves would qualify as significant under most if not all of the significance criteria. PSR together with an adjoining area of private forest land are included in GW’s Key Native Ecosystem (KNE) programme, and the priority as a high value terrestrial biodiversity sites confirmed in a recent assessment (GWRC 2016) (see section 3.17 below). RCKSR is listed as a priority ecosystem unit on public conservation lands and waters (excluding marine) in the Wellington CMS region identified by the Department through its natural heritage prioritising processes (DOC 2017).

3.9 Fauna habitats Fauna habitats recognised in the application site, are as follows: ▪ Indigenous scrub (mahoe, rangiora) ▪ Indigenous forest (kohekohe, tawa, rewarewa, mahoe, tree ferns) ▪ Exotic rank (ungrazed) grassland ▪ Exotic scrub (gorse, blackberry & indigenous shrubs) ▪ Exotic pine forest (radiata pine, macrocapa) ▪ Gum forest (mixture of Eucalyptus species) ▪ Planted amenity trees with maintained grass understorey ▪ Watercourses (small rocky streams, intermittent water present, permanent water flow) ▪ Constructed dams and lined concrete channel (in places between the northern and southern reservoirs). These fauna habitat types are similar to the vegetation types described in Wildlands (2014) and in Table 2 above, but with more emphasis on different types of exotic forest (as offering fauna habitat) and also including freshwater habitats.

3.10 Birds For the present assessment a bird survey specifically observing birds in the application site was undertaken as described in section 2. A summary of the results follows. Twenty-one indigenous and 13 exotic bird species have been recorded within the Rangituhi/western reserves area. Only ten of the 21 indigenous bird species were detected during the field survey for the Porirua Adventure Park proposal (Table 2). A further two indigenous species, morepork and shining cuckoo are likely to be present but were not detected due to the timing of the survey. Kereru detected during the Porirua Adventure Park survey were mainly restricted to mature indigenous forest, where more suitable feeding and breeding habitat is present. Bellbird are

pg. 21

reported to occupy both mature forest, as well as younger stature forest and scrub, and planted Eucalyptus forest in TRoR (Wildlands, 2014; Philippa Crisp, GWRC, pers. comm., 6 March 2018). It is unclear why there were not detected during the survey, but repeated surveys in less windy conditions are likely to make them more conspicuous. Scared kingfisher have been recorded from the Rangituhi/western reserves area, and it is not known why they were not detected during the survey. NZ pipit are common in grassland habitat, but were not detected during the survey, probably because of the windy conditions. Less common species including red-crowned parakeet and whitehead appear to have resident populations within the more mature forest within the Rangituhi/western reserves area. Mature forest occupies a relatively small area of the total surveyed for the Porirua Adventure Park. NI kaka and yellow-crowned kakariki have been recorded only a few times in the area, and are probably occasional visitors. NZ falcon have also been recorded on only a few occasions at higher altitudes on Rangituhi, and it is possible that a breeding pair(s) have established. Records of yellow-crowned kakariki and NZ falcon are as recent as 2017. GWRC have undertaken regular bird counts in the PSR, dating back to 2011, and although not always showing up in the bird count data, observations of bellbird, whitehead, red-crowned parakeet and more recently, yellow-crowned parakeet and falcon have become increasingly common in Rangituhi/western reserves area (Phillipa Crisp, GWRC, pers. comm., 6 March 2018). Records have also been received of red-crowned parakeets recently colonising contiguous forest areas next to the reserve including Spicer Forests and Redwood Bush. It appears that these species are dispersing from a combination of source populations within Zealandia in Wellington City, from nearby islands (Mana, Matiu/Somes and Kapiti Islands) and other mainland reserves. A focus on predator removal or more intensive predator control has probably facilitated population increases of these rarer species. The exotic birds detected during the survey have been previously recorded as being present in the Rangituhi/western reserves area. A notable absence from the survey were eastern rosella, a bird that is usually conspicuous if present. The conservation status of the indigenous birds recorded in the Rangituhi/western reserves area is summarised below in section 3.17. Threatened species include whitehead (At Risk - Declining), NZ pipit (At Risk - Declining), red-crowned parakeet (At Risk - relict), NI kaka (At Risk - recovering) and NZ falcon (At Risk - recovering).

pg. 22

Table 2: Bird species observed at the Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve and Te Rahui o Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Parklands, January-February 2018.

Indigenous Species: Grey warbler Gerygone igata North Island fantail Rhipidura fuliginosa New Zealand pigeon/kereru Hemiphaga New Zealand pigeon Pukeko Porphyrio melanotus Silvereye Zosterops lateralis Southern black-backed gull Larus dominicanus Swamp harrier Circus approximans Tui Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae Welcome swallow Hirundo neoxena Exotic Species: Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs Common starling Sturnus vulgaris Eurasian blackbird Turdus merula Eurasian skylark Alauda arvensis European goldfinch Carduelis carduelis European greenfinch Carduelis chloris Dunnock Prunella modularis House sparrow Passer domesticus Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Song thrush Turdus philomelos Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella

Data from the line transects within the application site showed the greatest diversity of species in locations with a mosaic of exotic forest and indigenous scrub while lowest diversity was in exotic grassland. A range of habitat types in close proximity will support a wide range of indigenous and exotic bird species (pers. obs.). Highest numbers of indigenous bird species were detected in indigenous forest and scrub, and lowest numbers in exotic grassland and pine forest (Fig. 7). In contrast the highest numbers of exotic bird species were detected in exotic gum forest, parkland (at SBP) and in indigenous scrub. Of the indigenous species detected along the Gondola corridor silvereye and tui were the commonest (Fig. 8). Southern black backed gull were observed flying high above the forest canopy and would be well clear of the gondola. Eurasian blackbird and common starling were the commonest exotic bird species. From the subset of bird count stations (7 of the total 18 bird count stations) positioned along the Gondola corridor silvereye, house sparrow and goldfinch had the greatest numbers detected per station. Tui as well as silvereye were widely spread being detected at most stations. The mean number of bird species detected per five-minute bird count from all count stations distributed over the application site was 4.9 birds/count station. The ratio of indigenous to exotic birds was a mean of 4:3 averaged over all count stations. Taking indigenous forest bird species only this reduces to 2.74 birds/count station.

pg. 23

This falls within the range reported from a bird monitoring study in Wellington City reserves – 2.5 to 3.0 indigenous forest species per station (McArthur, Harvey & Flux, 2015). The mean number of individuals per five-minute bird count for the more commonly encountered indigenous forest bird species is lower for grey warbler and silvereye than the range reported from the Wellington City reserves bird monitoring study (Table 3). Tui abundance fell within the range reported, but fantail abundance was considerably higher. Habitat differences may explain the lower numbers of grey warbler and silvereye where the Wellington reserves study was within indigenous forest only and did not include exotic habitat types. Fluctuating populations in response to seasonal difference between years probably explains the difference in fantail abundance. Fluctuations in relative abundance of common indigenous birds from year to year in the Wellington reserves was thought to have in response to changes in local food supply, although increased efforts to control mammalian predators is thought to have a positive effect. A similar situation applies to the indigenous bird population in the Porirua western forests, although there is currently a lower level of predator control. Any future counts can use the mean number of bird species detected per five-minute bird count to create indices to identify trends over time in the relative abundance and/or conspicuousness of all species, indigenous species only or individual bird species. Wellington City reserves study reported blackbird, chaffinch, common starling, house sparrow and dunnock has the most frequently- encountered exotic bird species. A similar result was found at Porirua Adventure Park survey although less dunnock were detected and European goldfinch were commonly encountered in the non-forested habitats.

Table 3: Mean number of individuals of common indigenous bird species per five-minute bird count from a survey undertaken in February 2018within the proposed Porirua Adventure Park site.

Bird Species Mean No. Individuals/Count Station (n=18) Porirua Adventure Park Wellington City Bird Survey Survey (2011-2014)

Greywarbler 0.67 0.8 to 1.3

Fantail 0.61 0.2 to 0.3

Silvereye 1.89 1.9 to 2.4

Tui 1.11 0.8 to 2.2

pg. 24

Figure 7: Birds detected along line transects within the proposed Porirua Adventure Park application site, February 2018.

pg. 25

pg. 26

pg. 27

Figure 8: Birds recorded along the proposed Gondola corridor within the application site, February 2018.

pg. 28

3.11 Lizards Species of lizards previously recorded in the Rangituhi/western reserves area include Southern North Island forest gecko (Mokopirirakau sp. 'Southern North Island forest gecko') and an unidentified skink species (from the Department of Conservation herpetofauna database records, reported by Wildlands, 2014). Wellington green gecko (Naultinus punctatus) was sighted during our field work, adjacent to the Farm Road near the TRoR/RCKSR boundary (Fig. 9). It is possible that the common gecko (Woodworthia maculata), spotted skink (Oligosoma lineoocellatum) and common skink (Oligosoma polychroma) are also present in the area as suitable habitat exists for these species within the area. The two skink species occupy open habitat such as grasslands and rocky areas as well as scrub, such as found in the upper area of the proposed gondola and buildings were the gondola would terminate. The gecko species are more likely to be in the forested habitat on the lower slopes although the Wellington green gecko would inhabit scrub areas. Both common gecko and common skink are regarded as Not Threatened, southern North Island forest gecko and Wellington green gecko as At Risk – declining, and spotted skink as At Risk – Relict. If pest control targets are being meet within the Rangituhi/western reserves area then healthy populations of at least forest gecko, common gecko, Wellington green gecko and common skink could exist within the application site.

Figure 9: Photo of the Wellington green gecko (Naultinus punctatus). Caption: This individual was observed near Farm Road, Te Rahui o Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Parklands, Porirua City during a site visit by Paul Blaschke and others, March 2018.

pg. 29

3.12 Bats Wildlands (2014) report a bat record close to Makara c.12km southwest of Rangituhi and it is possible long tailed bats (Chalinolobus tuberculatus) are present within the Rangituhi/western reserves area. Long-tailed bats have large home range (100 km2) and are known to forage along forest margins, and to use hollows in large trees including exotic trees for roosting sites. The large pine trees present within the mid-slopes of CKRSR are potential roosting habitat, but pine trees of similar maturity or size are absent from the application site. There are mature kohekohe trees within the application site but these species tend to have smooth trunks and have few cavities or hollows, probably making them less suitable for bat roosting sites. Similar most of the exotic trees within the application site are younger-aged and offer less suitable habitat for bats.

3.13 Freshwater fauna

3.13.1 Freshwater fish Records of freshwater fish within Mitchell Stream and its tributaries within RCKSR and TRoR were obtained from the National Freshwater Fish Database (NIWA) (February 2018), and from information contained in the Wildlands Report (2014). The more common fish species have been recorded here as well as the threatened giant kokupu (Galaxias fasciatus) and long-fin eel (Anguilla dieffenbachia) (Table 4). It was observed by the authors of this report that the banded kokupu (Galaxias fasciatus) in the upper reaches of Mitchell Stream (above the northern Reservoir) were notably large individuals, and it is possible that the records of giant kokopu were in fact a misidentification Further investigation to confirm the presence of giant kokopu is warranted (A.Davis and P.Blaschke pers.obs.). In the lower reaches of Mitchell Stream including its eastern tributaries common bully (Gobiomorphus cotidianus), red-fin bully (Gobiomorphus huttoni), common smelt (Retropinna retropinna), inanga (Galaxias maculatus)as well as the introduced brown trout (Salmo trutta) have been recorded. There are at least two very likely fish passage barriers preventing movement of fish from the Porirua Estuary to the Mitchell Stream and within lower Mitchell Stream (F Forsyth, Wildland Consultants Ltd, unpub. Information 2009), and there is at least one likely fish barrier at SBP (ford/spillway on current access road) and another below the northern reservoir (concrete ramp). Trout are known to be poor climbers and the instream barriers will prevent their passage to above the reservoirs, and is likely to explain the presence of good populations of kokupu in the upper Mitchell Stream. Banded kokopu juveniles are comparatively good climbers and may well be able to climb past the barriers known within the lower Mitchell Stream. However, they are capable if establishing land-locked populations, and can complete their life cycle without needing to migrate to the sea. This compares to bullies which are poor climbers and also are strictly diadromous and do not establish land-locked populations. Both banded kokopu and red-fin bully juveniles are known to be more sensitive to the effects of siltation in streams than other fish species, and they avoid streams with suspended sediments from eroding sedimentary catchments (NIWA, 2018)

pg. 30

Table 4: Freshwater fish records from the upper Mitchell Stream and its tributaries, within Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve and Colonial Knob Park, Porirua City

Common Name Scientific Name Conservation Status Records

Banded kokopu Galaxias fasciatus Not threatened NIWA (2018), Wildlands (2014)

Giant kokopu Galaxias argenteus At risk- declining NIWA (2018)

Koura Paranephrops spp. Not threatened Wildlands (2014)

Long-fin eel Anguilla dieffenbachii At risk- declining NIWA (2018), Wildlands (2014) Short-fin eel Anguilla australis Not threatened NIWA (2018), Wildlands (2014)

3.13.2 Freshwater macroinvertebrates Under the operating conditions for Spicer Landfill, biological monitoring was conducted at eight locations at two sites (four upstream and four downstream) on 29 October 2016 and 30 April 20172 (Tonkin & Taylor Ltd 2017). On the October 2016 sampling, at upstream sites the number of taxa ranged between 15 and 19, the Macroinvertebrate Community Index (MCI) values ranged between 111 and 132, and the Semi-Quantitative MCI (SQMCI) ranged between 5.37 and 5.82. On average the upstream Stark and Maxted quality class was excellent. At downstream sites, the number of taxa ranged between 14 and 22, the SQMCI ranged between 3.65 and 4.68, and MCI values ranged between 100 and 111. On average downstream Stark and Maxted quality class was good/fair. On the April 2017 sampling, at upstream sites number of taxa ranged between 15 and 17, the SQMCI ranged between 6.80 and 7.27, while MCI values ranged between 133 and 141. On average upstream Stark and Maxted quality class was excellent. At downstream sites number of taxa ranged between 13 and 26, the SQMCI ranged between 6.40 and 7.26, while MCI values ranged between 112 and 123. On average downstream Stark and Maxted quality class was excellent/good. Over the year, the macroinvertebrate monitoring suggests that water quality at the downstream sites has increased somewhat over the year. However, the MCI data indicate the difference between upstream and downstream sites remained similar to previous years.

2 Samples collected by ELS, and identification carried out at Cawthron Institute

pg. 31

Figure 10: Mitchell Stream crossing within the Spicer Botanical Park.

Caption: Looking downstream showing the eroding and poor condition stream habitat.

pg. 32

3.14 Summary of threatened species and ecosystems Threatened species recorded within the application site include:

Species - Fauna ▪ Giant kokopu At Risk - Declining ▪ Long-fin eel At Risk - Declining ▪ NZ falcon At Risk - Recovering ▪ NZ pipit At Risk - Declining ▪ Red-crowned parakeet At Risk - Relict ▪ Southern North Island forest gecko At Risk - Declining ▪ Spotted skink At Risk - Relict ▪ Whitehead At Risk - Declining ▪ Wellington green gecko At Risk - Declining

Species – Flora ▪ Adiantum diaphanum Locally occurring maidenhair fern ▪ Adiantum fulvum Locally occurring maidenhair fern ▪ Adiantum viridescens Locally occurring maidenhair fern ▪ Drymoanthus adversus Locally occurring epiphytic orchid ▪ Gastrodia cunninghamii Locally occurring terrestrial orchid ▪ Microsorum novae-zealandiae An historic record of a montane species ▪ Pseudopanax edgerleyii Localised in Mill Stream ▪ Pterostylis porrecta At Risk - Naturally uncommon, a rare greenhood orchid ▪ Streblus banksii At Risk - Relict, a large-leaved milk tree ▪ Winika cunninghamii Not common in the Rangituhi/western reserves

Ecosystems One of the criteria of significance in the Wellington RPS is rarity. For ecosystems this criterion is evaluated in terms of the percentage of a land environment remaining nationally. ▪ The majority of the application site is classified as At-Risk environment with 20-30% indigenous vegetation remaining nationally within this type of land environment. ▪ Relatively small areas of the application site are classified as Acutely Threatened (10-20% remaining nationally ▪ Some area is regarded as Less Reduced and Better Protected (>30% remaining nationally).

pg. 33

3.15 Pest plants A wide range of pest plants (species that are a pest plant or have the potential to become a pest plant, commonly known as weeds) have been observed within the application site. The most significant include: ▪ African clubmoss (Selaginella kraussiana) ▪ Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus agg.) ▪ Broom (Cytisus scoparius) ▪ Climbing asparagus (Asparagus scandens) ▪ Flowering cherry (Prunus avium) ▪ Gorse (Ulex europaeus) ▪ Karo (Pittosporum crassifolium, not indigenous to the Wellington region) saplings observed in the rank grassland. ▪ Macrocarpa (Cupressus macrocarpa) ▪ Old mans beard (Clematis vitalba) ▪ Radiata pine (Pinus radiata) ▪ Tradescantia (Tradescantia fluminensis) ▪ White pampas (Cortaderia selloana) – present in low numbers. It is understood that PCC, GWRC and DOC all have separate pest plant control programmes in the reserves aimed at identified key ecological weed species. Removal of pines and macrocarpa, both wildling and some planted stands is a key focus of the pest plant programme for DOC in the RCKSR. It is understood that another priority for DOC is to continue with its control of pines and macrocarpa from its reserve as funding allows (Dave Allen, Department of Conservation, pers. comm.). DOC is also controlling tradescantia, old mans beard and blackberry along walking tracks and the forest margins in the lower slopes of RCKSR. Volunteers are understood to be assisting the Department with this work.

Pest plant control as outlined is a key focus for GWRC as set out within the Key Native Ecosystem Plan for Porirua Western Forests (2015). Apart from the species mentioned above, the highest priority weed species for control in areas similar to those in the application site include:

▪ Climbing asparagus (Asparagus scandens) ▪ Cape ivy (Senecio angulatus) ▪ Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) ▪ Montbretia (Crocosmia x crocosmiiflora) ▪ Onion weed (Allium triquetum) ▪ Stinking iris (Iris foetidissima) ▪ Greater bindweed (Calystegia sylvatica)

These pest plants have the capacity to invade the application site, spread either by birds or on footwear or wheeled vehicles. They are most likely to establish on bare surfaces such as along trail edges, forest edges and revegetation plantings.

pg. 34

Radiata pine and macrocarpa with their capacity to grow into tall trees will have the biggest impact on the operation of the gondola, especially where they are currently growing beneath the path of the gondola or in terms of future impact on trail users when they become over-mature and unstable. With the pine plantations on the lower slopes of TRoR and adjacent to SBP, as well as from the more distant Spicer Forest there will be ongoing invasion of wildling pines that will need to be managed in the future. Gorse and blackberry will eventually disappear with indigenous forest regeneration, and as such have not been listed as pest plants, but will persist in the forest margins, lower scrub and within the exotic forests.

3.16 Pest animals A range of pest animals are known to be present in the application site, including possums (Trichosurus vulpecula), rats (Rattus spp.), mustelids (Mustela spp.), hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus), mice (Mus domesticus), feral cats (Felis catus), hares (Lepus europaeus) and rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Hares and rabbits particularly favour the more open habitat and grasslands in the TRoR. It appears that feral goats and pigs occur within the Rangituhi western reserves on occasion, at when detected they are promptly removed (Gary Sue, GWRC pers.com). Possum control using bait stations (with brodifacoum toxin) is carried out by GWRC in PSR since 1196 (GWRC, 2015). In 2001 the density of bait stations was intensified to include rats, and mustelids and hedgehogs are now targeted using kill-traps. Poison bait stations and kill- traps are serviced every three months by GWRC. GWRC also undertakes intensive possum and mustelid control within a buffer area on private farmland adjoining PSR, and lower intensity possum control across the wider landscape between Makara and Porirua.

Kill-traps targeting mustelids targeting mustelids have been installed and serviced by the Mana Cycle Group on the northern edge of TRoR, but it does not appear that possum or rats are controlled within this reserve.

It is understood that DOC carry out possum and rat control using bait stations baited with diphacinone and feratox (encapsulated cyanide) in RCKSR. Currently only one round of baiting in winter is undertaken. DOC is in the process of overhauling its control operation to increase its baiting frequency and to use a more effective toxin, cholecalciferol for rats (Dave Allen, Department of Conservation pers. comm.). No mustelid or hedgehog control is currently undertaken by DOC within RCKSR due to the lack of funding, although some secondary poisoning of these species is expected from the use of brodifacoum and cholecalciferol.

There is no record of a targeted rabbit or hare control programme within the Porirua Western Forests, although poison baiting has been recommended prior to any revegetation plantings within TRoR (Landmark Consulting Ltd 2010). Also, there is no record of cats being controlled in any of the Porirua Western Forests.

pg. 35

3.17 Summary of ecological values Ecological values of the reserves within which the application site is located are described in general terms in planning documents for the respective areas. For PSR, an earlier Management Plan (Porirua City Council 1994) was revised and incorporated into the City-wide Reserves Management Plan (Porirua City Council 2013). RCKSR is described and management prescriptions contained within the Wellington Conservation Strategy (DOC 1996). A proposed draft version of this Conservation Management Strategy is under consideration (DOC 2016). A Restoration Plan for TRoR was developed in 20103 (Landmark Consulting Ltd 2010) and is currently being implemented by PCC. PCC and GWRC consider PSR regionally important as it is one of few lowland tawa-kohekohe forests in the region with podocarps, and contains both coastal and inland forest. GWRC has included PSR and some surrounding areas with its Key Native Ecosystem (KNE) programme which seeks to protect some of the best examples of ecosystem types.in the operative Conservation Management Strategy (CMS) for the management of DOC reserves, RCKSR is described as a key place the Department manages in the Wellington Conservancy. The forest is described as, although modified, regenerating well and in combination with PSR a substantial forest habitat and landscape feature. In the draft revised Conservation Management Strategy (DOC 2016), RCKSR has been identified as a priority ecosystem unit in one of the seven important ‘places’ that have been prioritised for the purposes of integrated conservation management and which require some specific management direction. This site is prioritised for the indigenous species and the habitats and ecosystems it supports, including the presence of Wellington green gecko, indigenous bird species (bellbird, whitehead, red and yellow-crowned parakeet and NZ falcon), and original tawa/kohekohe forest and other coastal and lowland forest.

3 The reserve was known as Colonial Knob Reserve at the time the Restoration Plan was developed. Although the Restoration Plan is labelled as ‘Draft’ it is our understanding that this plan was adopted by Council.

pg. 36

4.0 Assessment of Ecological Effects The level of potential ecological effects were assessed by looking at both the magnitude of the effect and ecological value effected ( refer Table 5). This follows the ecological effects assessment methodology recommended by EIANZ (2016), but specific terms have been modified to suit the views of the authors of this report. Very high and high level of effects are recommended by the authors to be avoided or have a high intensity of mitigation. Moderate level of effects are recommended to be avoided through design, remedied or have a level of mitigation in scale with the unavoidable effects. Low and very low level of effects are recommended to be managed to minimise effects through good design, construction measures and methodologies and operational measures.

Table 5: Recommended methodology to assess level of adverse effects on ecology. After the Environmental Institute Australia and New Zealand (EIANZ) guidelines for undertaking ecological effects assessments (2016). Ecological Value Very high High Moderate Low Magnitude Very high Significant Significant More than minor Minor adverse adverse effect adverse effect adverse effect effect High Significant Significant Minor adverse Less than minor adverse effect adverse effect effect adverse effect Moderate Significant More than minor Less than minor No discernible adverse effect adverse effect adverse effect effect Low Minor adverse Less than minor Less than minor No discernible effect adverse effect adverse effect effect Negligible Less than minor No discernible No discernible No discernible adverse effect effect effect effect

The following potential adverse effects on vegetation, habitats, and indigenous flora and fauna have been assessed separately for the construction and operational stages of the proposed Project. Details on measures to avoid or remediate adverse effects are provided in section 5 below. Where residual adverse effects remain mitigation measures are proposed.

4.1 Construction effects

4.1.1 Disturbance and loss of indigenous vegetation from construction Complete vegetation clearance would also be required for the following construction areas: An estimated 6,090m2 of vegetation will be cleared for buildings, the majority of which is exotic species within the Base Station area. A maximum of 7,700m2 of vegetation will be cleared for construction of the gondola and clearance to establish a gondola corridor, of which 7,250m2 will be top canopy pine clearance only (refer proposed felling area plan – A1.14). The first 20 metres of this strip comprises 450m2 of clearance of secondary indigenous forest (mahoe forest). Two towers will also be constructed in this cleared area.

pg. 37

The approximately 90 m2 cleared around each tower will be replaced by grassland or have a grass cover reinstated. 20m2 of exotic dominated vegetation will be cleared at the sites of the zipline end structures. Fig. 11 below shows the location of both proposed and existing trails within the application site. The total length of the proposed trails for walking and mountain biking is 23,339 metres, distributed between all four reserves with most trails proposed for TRoR, then PSR, RCKSR and SP in that order. It is estimated that 32,891 m2 of vegetation will be cleared for the construction of trails (Table 6). Refer full details of estimated earthworks / clearance in the trail table included in Section 6 of the application. The majority of the area to be cleared of vegetation is within the TRoR at 26,272 m2 or 80% of the total.

Table 6: Vegetation clearance for proposed trail construction by Reserve

Reserve Vegetation Clearance for Proposed Trails Area (m2) % of Total Porirua Scenic Reserve 4,865 15 Te Rahui o Rangituhi Reserve 26,272 80 Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve 1,691 5

Spicer Botanical Park 63 <1 Total Area Cleared 32,891

An assessment of the amount of vegetation that will be cleared distributed by broad vegetation class estimated 10,730 m2 or 33% of total area to be cleared to be in pasture or grassland, which is mainly within TRoR (Table 7). The next two vegetation classes most affected by trail construction are exotic forest and then indigenous forest, with 30% and 21% of total area respectively. In total, 7,748 m2 of indigenous forest dominated vegetation types will be cleared. The effects of trail construction vary significantly depending on the type of vegetation affected and the type of trail being constructed. Easier grade trails are generally wider and as they are also more gently graded the total length as well as ground area affected is much greater. In all types of vegetation, and for all types of trail, the ground cover and all vegetation to a height of approx. 3m will be removed over the width of the trail corridor. However, harder graded trails are steeper and narrower and therefore turns can be much sharper (zig-zag formation) and there can be more potential to create bare ground gaps between trail sections on those sharp bends. In grassland and low-stature scrub/shrubland vegetation the amount of clearance required would be to the full height of the existing vegetation canopy. However, in taller types of forest (types 1,2, 6, 7 and significant areas of types 3, 4 and 5), there will be no, or at most minimal areas of canopy clearance as canopy trees are recommended to be avoided to the greatest extent possible. It is understood that Porirua Adventure Park are proffering a condition that will require this.

pg. 38

Clearance would take place in understorey and occasionally extend into the sub-canopy. The greatest disturbance would occur in the lower forest and scrub vegetation types (vegetation types 8-12 and some areas of types 3, 4 and 5) where the canopy is lower than about 4m high, where clearance would extend into the canopy and create a linear canopy gap. These canopy gaps have the potential to create an “edge effect” whereby the exposed forest or scrub edges are more susceptible to damage from wind and storms. In practice however, examination of existing walking and MTB trails in the application site and the rest of PSR do not indicate significant visual forest edge damage. Appendix 2 provides the calculations used to estimate the length of trails and area of vegetation to be cleared within each reserve, distributed by vegetation type.

Table 7: Trail lengths (m) by vegetation type for all reserves

Vegetation Type Vegetation Clearance for Proposed Trails Area (m2) % of Total Indigenous forest (total) 7,036 21 1 Tawa-kohekohe-(podocarp) forest 573 2 Tawa-mahoe-(podocarp) forest 3 Tawa-mahoe forest 3,547 4 Mahoe-(tawa) forest 968 5 Mahoe forest 1,948 Exotic forest (total) 9,761 30 6 Exotic conifer-dominated forest 3,219 7 Exotic broadleaved-dominated forest 6,542 Indigenous scrub (total) 722 2 8 High altitude scrub 252 9 Mahoe-gorse scrub 470 Exotic scrub (total) 4,641 14 10 Gorse scrub 1,344 11 Exotic scrub 3,297 Other 12 Indigenous shrubland 13 Pasture grassland 10,730 33 Total Area Cleared 32,891

Assessment of level of ecological effects: Minor in TRoR. More than minor in RCKSR and PSR. Positive effect with mitigation.

pg. 39

Figure 11: Proposed trials to be constructed for the Porirua Adventure Park.

Taken from the main application document. Prepared by Select Contracts

pg. 40

4.1.2 Loss of exotic trees in Spicer Botanical Park No indigenous trees will be removed for development of buildings and facilities at either the top or bottom stations. However, development of the facilities for the bottom station in SBP will necessitate the removal of 57 mature (up to 30 years old) planted exotic trees. These are mostly Eucalyptus species, plus a number of Tasmanina blackwood, and a few silver wattle, swamp she-oak, shining teatree/Australian manuka and a recently planted redwood. (Cheryl Robilliard pes.com.) These trees have aesthetic values, of scientific interest and provide habitat for birds The impact of the loss of these trees from a landscape and heritage perspective is covered in the Visual and Landscape Assessment undertaken for this application. These trees have some habitat values as well as landscape and visual amenity values as discussed in the landscape assessment. However, all the trees are common in the local landscape, do not have significant heritage values, and can be replaced with specimen trees that would replicate the ecological benefits of the trees lost within a comparatively short time.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor before remediation. Less than minor with remediation.

4.1.3 Loss of terrestrial habitat for indigenous fauna In the first instance, construction effects on indigenous fauna has sought to be avoided by the placement of the majority of the towers and the zipline ends outside areas of terrestrial habitat for indigenous fauna. In this respect, only c.450m2 of indigenous forest and scrub habitat within the application site will be lost to enable the construction of two of the 12 (and associated corridor clearance – refer potential felling plan) total number of towers located within these habitats (see section 4.1.1 above). The remaining towers are in grassland of low habitat value for indigenous birds, or in exotic forest or parkland (SBP) that is of low to moderate habitat value for indigenous birds, although not for all lizard species. There will also be clearance of understorey vegetation in indigenous forest or scrub to construct new walking and mountain bike tracks, as detailed above in section 4.1.1. Buildings will avoid clearance of any indigenous vegetation. Construction of the bottom station in the SBP will result in the removal of exotic trees, mainly eucalypts, which constitutes minor fauna habitat; however, this is considered a less than minor ecological effect because of the abundance of other similar suitable habitat in the immediate vicinity. In summary, due to small area of indigenous vegetation to be cleared in the context of the total area of indigenous terrestrial habitat in the application site and the Rangituhi/western reserves area in general, potential adverse effects on availability of breeding and roosting habitat, and food sources for terrestrial indigenous fauna is regarded to be minor.

Assessment of level of ecological effects: Minor. Positive effect with mitigation.

pg. 41

4.1.4 Loss of freshwater habitat No freshwater habitat will be lost permanently during or as a result of the construction stage of the Project. However, there could potentially be temporary loss of habitat if streams become contaminated with sediment runoff (see section 4.1.9 below)

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Less than minor. Positive effect with mitigation.

4.1.5 Loss of individuals and breeding pairs of terrestrial fauna Due to the small area of vegetation clearance it is unlikely to lead to permanent loss of breeding pairs of indigenous birds. There is the potential that some lizard individuals may be lost within the application site during the construction of the facilities, especially construction of the top station that is currently in grassland habitat favoured by skinks. Measures implemented during construction will reduce any potential loss. Skinks inhabit ground and lower vegetation tiers so are more likely to be disturbed than geckos. The Wellington green gecko inhabits low-growing vegetation such as scrub to a greater degree than other gecko species, and as such would be more vulnerable to disturbance. Current information suggest that it is unlikely bats are present within the application site. However, should bats be discovered a process outlined in an environmental management plan will be implemented to avoid or reduce effects (such as permanently or temporarily avoiding removal of trees found to be used by bats. It is also unlikely that freshwater fish will be adversely affected during the construction phase provided design of stream crossings does not create new barriers to fish passage and contamination or sedimentation is avoided.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor before remediation. Less than Minor with remediation. Positive effect with mitigation.

4.1.6 Decline or loss of threatened species Decline of populations or loss of threatened species within the application site and wider Rangituhi//western reserves area is not expected, with the possible exception of NZ falcon. No threatened plant species were observed growing within the proposed construction sites. An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) (that is recommended in this report) will provide a process to avoid or reduce effects should any threatened plant species be discovered during construction. A similar approach will be taken if bats are discovered in the application site (see section 4.1.5 above).

pg. 42

Rather than decline or loss of threatened fauna species the proposed Project is expected to result in a positive benefit. This is from improved management of fauna habitat by pest control, as discussed under mitigation options. Species that are expected to benefit include red- crowned parakeet, whitehead, Wellington green gecko, speckled skink, long-fin eel, kokupu, and possibly NI kaka should they establish in the Rangituhi/western reserves area in the future. NZ falcon along with Australasian harrier and kereru (the latter two species are not threatened) may possibly be affected during the construction of the gondola, but more likely to be affected during its operation (See section 4.2.3 below for a discussion on these potential effects). NZ pipit is unlikely to be affected by the construction from the proposed Project, as they inhabit grassland and low scrub habitats, rarely flying at any great height above the ground.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor before remediation. Less than minor with remediation. Positive effect with mitigation.

4.1.7 Dust, noise and vibration Airborne dust may be created during the period of construction. There is a small risk of temporary adverse effects on adjacent vegetation including indigenous forest and scrub, that also provides indigenous fauna habitat. Noise and vibration during construction from the use of machines may disturb terrestrial fauna, but it is considered that these effects will be temporary and less than minor. It is understood that an Earthworks and Construction Management Plan will be drafted that will included dust mitigation measures that will be put in place during construction to reduce quantities of dust if this becomes an issue.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Less than Minor.

4.1.8 Disruption to terrestrial ecosystem function Disruption to terrestrial ecosystem function such as pollination and seed dispersal, and regeneration processes, increase in edge: core habitat ratio (edge effect) and lessening of ecological connectivity that also degrades habitat quality for indigenous fauna may occur as a result of the construction within the site. These effects are considered to be minor due to the small area of clearance, and the works will be temporary until the benefits from improved ecological management of the site, and new revegetation plantings establish.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor. Positive effects with time from mitigation.

pg. 43

4.1.9 Disruption to freshwater ecosystem function Earthworks for trail and facilities construction, if not effectively managed to avoid sedimentation, have the potential to cumulatively cause a significant adverse effect on freshwater ecosystems of the RSCKSR reservoir, the Mitchell Stream and its tributaries and ultimately the estuarine ecosystems of the Porirua Harbour. It is estimated that around 20,000 m3 of sediment will be disturbed from earthworks during construction (includes earthworks associated with building and trail construction), some of which is within 20m of Mitchell Stream and its tributaries. Accidental spills of hazardous substances occurring during construction of all facilities could also lead to chemical contamination which would degrade stream habitat for all biota. The potential for contamination is likely to be greatest around the lower part of the application site (base of gondola and base station buildings), adjacent to the Mitchell Stream. There is also the potential for contamination of the reservoir in RCKSR resulting from the construction of any boardwalk sections of Trail 7 around the northern reservoir.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Sedimentation – More than Minor before remediation. Less than minor with remediation; Contamination from hazardous substances – Minor before remediation. Less than Minor with remediation.

4.1.10 Indirect effects on ecosystems, habitats and species The main indirect risk is the accidental introduction of pest plants via seeds on vehicles, mountain bikes and equipment or in soil in planting stock for revegetation. Also, from windblown seed establishing on bare soil before re-establishment of a vegetative cover. There is already a significant pest plant seed or propagule load within the application site and the proposed construction should not add significantly to that, although new species of pest plant could be introduced, especially along at the tower sites and new trail routes as they are being constructed. There is a potential risk of fire caused by construction works that would potentially destroy indigenous forest and scrub.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Pest Plant introductions - More than Minor before remediation. Minor with remediation; Wildfire – Minor before remediation. Less than Minor with remediation.

pg. 44

4.2 Operational effects

4.2.1 Further loss of indigenous vegetation and habitat for terrestrial indigenous fauna There is the potential for some loss of indigenous vegetation cover over time during the ongoing operation of the facility caused by trampling or bike wheel compression from recreational users (both walking and biking). This risk may be greatest on zig-zag turns on trails, where the narrowness of the separation between trail segments leads to users (especially walkers) directly crossing from one segment to another and proliferating the trail footprint. Good design of trail tracks should avoid further vegetation loss. The proposal to establish indigenous revegetation plantings in areas within TRoR (refer mitigation package below) that are currently in grassland will offset any potential loss from the operation of the facilities within the application site.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor before remediation. Less than Minor with remediation. Positive effects with mitigation.

4.2.2 Ongoing degradation of freshwater habitat Stormwater runoff carrying sediment and other contaminants from the operation of the vehicle accessway, parking area and mountain bike wash station(s) has the potential for low to moderate adverse effects on stream habitat. Macro-invertebrates will not survive in degraded water quality and some fish are known to avoid water with high loads of suspended sediment. Providing treatment facilities for these sources of stormwater will avoid or significantly reduce adverse effects of aquatic biota. There will be ongoing stormwater runoff carrying sediment from walking and mountain bike tracks especially at stream crossings and on steeper slopes. Design of tracks to disperse drainage over slopes rather than directly to streams will reduce these impacts, and a maintenance programme will ensure drainage channels continue to function as designed. Ongoing contamination of water in the northern reservoir may occur from leaching of timber or metal preservation chemicals such as copper-chrome-arsenate (CCA) preservatives used in timber. However, most studies show that this leaching adds little to background levels of copper, chromium and arsenic in either soil, water or sediments provided materials conform to treatment standards and specifications, to ensure that the preservative is properly fixed within the wood before the timber is used in any construction (Hedley, 1997).

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor before remediation. Less than Minor with remediation.

pg. 45

4.2.3 Physical barriers to bird flight paths and bird strike The gondola, zipline and building at the top of the gondola will be permanent features that may disrupt movement of indigenous birds including NZ falcon, Australasian harrier, kereru and southern black- backed gull. Also, death of birds may occur from bird strike on these structures. This includes established pairs breeding at the application site, as well potential pairs of NZ falcon that may expand into the site. The extent of disruption is not known although could be compared to the effects from wind turbines. Australasian harrier typically fly high above ground level, dropping to the ground to hunt prey or attend nests. It is possible that they will become entangled in the gondola structures or hit reflective surfaces such as panes of glass backlit by the outdoors. NZ falcon could be affected in the same way. Kereru are poor flyers and for most of the time move beneath the forest canopy. However, they will fly above the canopy when moving from one habitat patch to another or across a gully. Also, during the breeding season kereru partake in courtship display flights above the canopy. Their poor flying ability makes this species particularly vulnerable to striking built structures. Southern black backed gulls are less likely to be affected by the gondola and buildings as they generally fly high above the ground outside the range of the proposed structures. Given the relatively low number of these species currently present, the small length of gondola corridor and the zipline extending over high-quality bird habitat, and the known barrier avoidance flight of at least Australasian harrier and NZ falcon potential adverse effects are considered minor. However, adverse effects could conceivably increase if bird population numbers increase significantly. To remedy this it is proposed to monitor bird strikes, and should there be a significant adverse effect then implement management measures to reduce these effects. Positioning of reflective surfaces on the gondola and buildings to reduce bird entanglement or strike will be considered at the construction design stage.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor at present. More than Minor possible from future assessments. Implement measures to remedy if More than Minor.

4.2.4 Ongoing disturbance to indigenous fauna The operation of the facility is expected to result in increased visitation to the site. Increased visitation may generate increased noise, vibration and light levels at various times and places. The extent of potential adverse effects on indigenous fauna is difficult to predict but it is likely that such effects will be discernible for birds, particularly if populations increase significantly as a result of improved habitat management. To remedy this it is proposed to monitor bird populations, and should there be a significant adverse effect then implement management measures to reduce these effects.

pg. 46

No effects from these disturbances are expected for freshwater fauna. It would be difficult to detect meaningful changes in lizard populations in response to these disturbances.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor at present. More than Minor possible from future assessments. Implement measures to remedy if More than Minor.

4.2.5 Ongoing indirect effects Potential ongoing indirect effects relate to ongoing introduction of pest plant species on visitors’ bikes, footwear and clothing, as well as machinery and equipment required for operation of the facility. The establishment of well-formed foot and bike tracks may facilitate access by predators, including cats and mustelids, as well as by uncontrolled dogs. These predators are known to favour unobstructed areas to move through. Uncontrolled dogs can also disturb indigenous fauna. Measures are proposed to avoid or significantly reduce these indirect effects.

Assessment of significance of ecological effects: Minor at present. More than Minor possible from future assessments. Implement measures to remedy if More than Minor.

4.3 Overall assessment of ecological effects The assessment in sections 4.1 and 4.2 above identifies which effects need to be avoided, remedied or mitigated. This is summarised in Table 8 below, and where adverse effects have been assessed as being more than minor and cannot be avoided or remedied by design or management then mitigation is proposed as outlined in section 5. Ongoing effects assessed as minor now could led greater adverse effects in the future if visitor numbers from both Porirua Adventure Park customers and casual visitors to the reserves increase. Adverse effects may also increase if indigenous fauna populations increase as a result of environmental mitigation and restoration measures, but if this were to occur then that effect would be mitigated by the increased populations of native species.

pg. 47

Table 8:Summary of the level of ecological effects and proposed responses Ecological Effects Level of Effect Response No Action Avoid Remedy - Remedy – Mitigate Monitor Design Management Measures Construction Disturbance and loss of indigenous More than minor vegetation from tower and trail ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ construction

Loss of exotic trees in Spicer Less than minor Botanical Park ✓ ✓

Loss of terrestrial habitat for Minor indigenous fauna ✓ ✓ ✓

Loss of freshwater habitat Less than minor ✓ ✓

Loss of individuals and breeding pairs Minor of terrestrial fauna ✓ ✓ ✓

Decline or loss of threatened species Minor ✓ ✓ ✓

Dust, noise and vibration Less than minor ✓

Disruption to terrestrial ecosystem Minor ✓ ✓ function Disruption to freshwater ecosystem More than minor function ✓ ✓ ✓

Indirect effects on ecosystems, More than minor ✓ ✓ ✓ habitats and species – pest plants Indirect effects on ecosystems, Minor ✓ habitats and species – wildfire

pg. 48

Ecological Effects Level of Effect Response No Action Avoid Remedy - Remedy – Mitigate Monitor Design Management Measures Operations Further loss of indigenous vegetation Minor and habitat for terrestrial indigenous ✓ ✓ ✓ fauna

Ongoing degradation of freshwater Minor habitat ✓ ✓ ✓

Physical barriers to bird flight paths Minor to More than and bird strike Minor ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Ongoing disturbance to indigenous Minor to More than fauna – visitation, noise, vibration & Minor ✓ ✓ ✓ light levels

Ongoing indirect effects – from pests Minor to More than & dogs Minor ✓ ✓ ✓

pg. 49

5.0 Methods to Avoid, Remedy or Mitigate or Offset Potential Adverse Effects The assessment of potential actual and potential environmental effects that may arise from the construction and operation of the Project has identified adverse environmental effects ranging from more to less than minor as well as some environmental effects that are unknown or difficult to assess. Many of the effects that were recognised and described in the previous section have already been avoided or minimised at the time of assessment, through project design. These are set out in the section 5.1 below. More than minor adverse effects after avoidance and minimisation will then require remediation and/or mitigation to ensure that they are appropriately managed during construction and operation of the facility. These are set out in section 5.2 and 5.3. Unknown effects will also need to be addressed. It is concluded that there are no significant adverse effects after remediation and mitigation measures set out in the sections below have been implemented, and therefore no off-site offset measures have been proposed. Many of the measures identified in the section below will be set out in more detail in an Earthworks and Construction Management Plan (ECMP) to address effects, including effects on ecology from construction activities. It is also proposed that an Ecological Management Plan (EMP) be prepared to address identified effects on ecology during operational stages of the proposal and implementation of proposed mitigation measures. The finalisation of these two plans are recommended to be a condition of consent. Porirua Adventure Park have also agreed that a revision of the operative Management Plan for TRoR (Landmark Consulting Ltd 2010) should be undertaken, jointly between themselves and PCC, the details of which are to be set out in the project lease agreement – a process separate to the resource consent process.

5.1 Avoidance measures The following methods to avoid and minimise, as far as practicable, actual and potential adverse ecological effects have been recommended and now subsequently form part of the proposal. The majority of these measures have been incorporated into the project design considerations, while others will be specified through the proposed EMP and specified via construction methods and methodologies to be included in a finalised ECMP. It is expected that an independent ecological expert will be available during construction to advice on implementation of the ecological aspects of the management plans. Porirua Adventure Park Limited have confirmed that this requirement will be proffered as a condition of consent. Avoidance measures are: 1. Siting as many gondola towers and zip line ends as possible in exotic vegetation habitats such as grassland, and exotic scrub and forest. This has been achieved with 12 of the towers and the two zip line ends located in such habitats, and only two towers located in recently regenerated indigenous scrub and low forest. No gondola towers have been located within the RCKSR.

pg. 50

2. Avoiding clearance of mature indigenous trees, and possibly exotic trees where they are likely to provide potential bat roosting habitat. All trees and tree roots greater than 10cm diameter will be avoided wherever possible, and all trees and tree roots more than 50mm diameter that are proposed for clearance will require clearance from an independent ecological expert. 3. Minimising earthworks volumes to no more than levels provided for in the ECMP and otherwise conduct all trail building activities in a manner consistent with ECMP provisions and generally in ways that minimise sediment generation and delivery. It is understood this will form a requirement in the resource consent conditions. 4. Avoiding earthworks and/or cover excavated soil during windy periods to avoid wind erosion. It is understood that such measures will be included in the ECMP. 5. Reducing ongoing disturbances to fauna from dust, noise, vibration and light spill (light spill is particularly important during the operation of the facility given its duration). Porirua Adventure Park Limited will ensure that measures to reduce such disturbances (such as directing light downwards or inwards of buildings) will be dealt with in the ECMP, EMP and the lighting plans that will be finalised as a condition of consent. 6. Building all walking and mountain bike trails with drainage systems and water tables that do not increase scour or direct discharge of water into streams. Porirua Adventure Park Limited have provided details of the proposed trial construction methodology and guidelines in the application that addresses minimising these effects. 7. Building well-designed trails and signage encourage people and their bikes to keep to formed tracks. 8. Providing treatment of stormwater from the carpark, vehicle accessways and other known pollution sources and provide mountain bike wash-down facility. These measures have all been proposed in the application. 9. Building stream crossings (culverts, bridges and rock hardened swale surfaces) that divert sediment from waterways and provide fish passage. These measures have been proposed in the application. 10. Reducing the risk of ongoing pest plant seed introductions, as set out in a finalised EMP that will be provided as a condition of consent. 11. Reducing the risk of accidental fire from construction activities, as set out in a finalised ECMP. 12. Positioning of reflective surfaces on the gondola and buildings in such a way to reduce bird entanglement or strike. It is understood these design considerations will be worked through in the detailed design stage. 13. Undertaking major construction works, where practicable, outside the peak breeding season for indigenous birds (August to September). This may be of particular benefit to kereru who do frequent display fights above the canopy prior to each nesting cycle (from spring onwards).

pg. 51

5.2 Remediation measures The following methods to remedy potential adverse effects are proposed. It is proposed that further details of all remediation measures will be specified in a finalised the EMP. The below measures are understood to form part of the proposal and accordingly will be adhered to via conditions of consent.

5.2.1 Vegetation clearance 14. Tree felling and vegetation clearance will be limited to the areas outlined in Tree Felling Plan prepared as part of the application and the clearance methodologies to be included in the ECMP. It is expected that this plan will proposed best practice tree felling practices and ensure damage to surrounding vegetation is minimised where practicable, soil erosion and siltation of waterways is avoided, and vegetation remaining on-site will not present any risks to waterways.

5.2.2 Revegetation 15. Carry out revegetation of cleared surfaces (except the trails) to reduce the areas of bare ground following construction, where appropriate. Surfaces for replanting will concentrate on open ground where bare ground or new forest edges are exposed to wind exposure and wind-blown weed growth. Indigenous plant species will be selected for replanting, except at SBP where the current character of plantings include exotic species. In most situations the vegetation will need to be low-growing to accommodate structures placed at the site.

16. Understorey revegetation will not generally be carried out in taller forest vegetation where the canopy gaps are not created or are very small, because existing seedling and sapling growth is adequate in all forest types to ensure natural revegetation of small bare trailside areas. 17. Where vegetation is removed, replanting to replace lost vegetation, including disturbance to canopy and sub-canopy tiers is covered in the next section on mitigation. 18. All revegetation and planting works will be specified in the EMP, including plant selection, plant sources, site preparation, planting density and pattern and post-planting maintenance until canopy closure.

5.2.3 Pest plant control

19. Control plant pests that invade cleared areas around the gondola towers, zipline ends, buildings and in the grassland areas within the application site. Priority should include control of wildling conifers, karo, Tasmanian ngaio, flowering cherry, climbing asparagus, Japanese honeysuckle, old mans beard, white pampas and broom that are known to be present within the application area, or may invade from adjacent areas.

pg. 52

Monitor plant pests on all new trails and on all new facilities areas. Responses to pest plant incursions will be specified in the EMP that will have regard to the provisions of the current Porirua Reserves KNE Management Plan and the revised TRoR Restoration Plan. Working collaboratively with agencies undertaking pest plant control in the Porirua Western Reserves, including DOC, PCC, GWRC and community groups to undertake pest plant will achieve the greatest ecological gains. The overall objectives of the pest plant control will be to reduce the distribution and density of pest plants to levels that maintain indigenous plant dominance, reduce interference with indigenous forest regeneration and lessen risks of further spread of pest plants into undisturbed indigenous vegetation.

5.2.4 Pest animal control 20. Control of pest animals within the application area will reduce damage to terrestrial habitats and predation pressures. The adequacy of pest animal control within the application area varies, and the proposal to control possum and rats will provide positive benefits to indigenous fauna populations. Pest animal control is addressed in the mitigation proposals in section 5.3 below.

5.2.5 Domestic pets 21. Control dog access in collaboration with agencies). Currently no dogs are permitted in PSR or CKSR, and dogs must be on leads in TRoT. Adherence with dog control regulations can be encouraged by PAP operational staff in the application area.

5.2.6 Indigenous fauna 22. Improving knowledge on potential adverse effects from the gondola operation on birds especially including NZ falcon, Australasian harriers and kereru, by regular monitoring of bird collisions or strikes with the gondola and zipline, and developing adaptive response plans for bird deaths or adverse changes in behaviour related to the operation of the gondola and zipline.

23. To lessen potential lizard losses from construction activities it is proposed that a suitably qualified lizard expert delineate vegetation and other habitat features that are most likely to provide lizard habitat at the sites to be disturbed, and to be present during vegetation clearance. It is recommended that the following practices that have been used elsewhere in New Zealand are implemented - removal and stockpiling of foliage and retention for a 2 week period before mulching, and cutting trunks into 1.5m length logs and stacking into piles in nearby areas. Retaining foliage should allow time for lizards to escape and re- establish in surrounding areas, and the logs will provide refugia for the lizards as they adjust to their new location. Further it is recommended that rat control should commence prior to vegetation clearance to lessen predation risk to lizards, and increase the chances of lizards re-establishing in new habitat (see section 5.3). It is not recommended that there be survey and relocation of individuals prior to vegetation clearance or disturbance as this can be time consuming, costly and often few individuals are located for removal (Graham Ussher, pers.comm.).

pg. 53

5.2.7 Freshwater habitat 24. Provide for effective sediment control or any sediment generated from earthworks during construction, as specified in the finalised ECMP. 25. Construction and maintenance of stormwater treatment devices that will reduce levels of contamination to the stream. The extent to which stormwater treatment is undertaken will depend on the predicted usage of the access way and parking areas. 26. Provide a wash down facility for bikes will be built as part of the Project. A bunded area around the wash down facility to capture water runoff and allow settlement of sediment will reduce the risk of sediment reaching streams. 27. Improve fish habitat within SPB and the stream section between SBP and the RCKSR northern reservoir though protection from streambank erosion and reinstatement of streambed surface variability.

5.2.8 Accidental discovery 28. Procedures will be provided in the ECMP and EMP to follow should unidentified ecological effects arise during construction and operation of the facility. For instance, there is the potential that bats are discovered roosting in trees intended for clearance, birds become entangled in construction or operational equipment, or lizards or rare plants are discovered during vegetation clearance or operation of facilities.

5.3 Mitigation ‘package’ As well as the measures for avoidance, minimisation and remediation of effects discussed in previous sections, a package of mitigation measures covering all habitats and ecosystems in the application area is proposed. Such measures are proposed to mitigate significant effects as outlined in the assessment of effects above. The EMP would provide the detailed methods and resourcing required to achieve the objectives and output targets proposed in the sections below. These measures are in addition to and complement the remediation measures discussed in the previous section and the known current management activities of PCC and DOC in the reserves. Implementation of the all aspects of the mitigation package would be monitored for performance and ecological outcomes, to be specified in the EMP. The elements of the proposed mitigation package are:

5.3.1 Mitigation planting 29. Approx. 2 ha of additional native restoration planting will be planted in TRoR, with the aim of achieving a native ecological (vegetation and fauna habitat) connection between the two scenic reserves). The proposed planting would be concentrated in the “throat area” adjacent to the upper ends of the Colonial Knob Walkway and Te Ara Utiwai, extending downward towards the Adventure Park top station (Fig. 12). It is recommended that a variety of aspects and landforms will be vegetated, including some relatively sheltered areas. This planting would involve approx. 20,000 plants over 3 years. The objective of revegetation would be to achieve canopy closure and a diversity of plant species that

pg. 54

would naturally occur at the site within 7 years of the last planting. Indigenous species to be planted, planting regimes, and site preparation and planting after-care would be specified in the EMP. Rabbit and hare control (in addition to possum control – see in the section below) will be required until the time canopy closure is achieved to protect establishing plantings.

5.3.2 Enhanced pest animal control 30. A focused programme of animal pest control to include RCKSR possum control (for a total area of 107ha) in the lower part of TRoR and rat control in a part of RCKSR (for a total area of 60ha) (Fig.12) will contribute to mitigating unavoidable significant effects including loss of indigenous habitats and indirect effects on indigenous ecosystems. Pest animal control is also expected to provide ecological positive benefits through enhanced fauna populations and regeneration processes. Species to benefit from rat control include birds, lizards and invertebrates. The objective if the pest animal control would be to undertake possum and rat control to a level that allows for the maintenance and recovery of healthy populations of indigenous bird species and lizards. Monitoring of pest animal levels would assess progress in meeting control targets. Working collaboratively with the DOC, PCC, GWRC, Mana Cycle Club and community groups with interest in the conservation of the area, a co-ordinated approach can be taken to control pest animals over the wider Porirua Western Reserves. It is proposed that Porirua Adventure Park Limited fund establishment of possum and rat control in the area shown in Fig.12, and that thee service bait stations for a period of three years beginning when consent is obtained.

5.3.3 Provision of fish passage 31. Regrading of Mitchell Stream at SBP will be designed in conjunction with the new crossing and culvert in order to remove the current barrier to some indigenous fish species (e.g. redfin bully). A fish ladder/ spat rope may also be added to enhance fish passage. It is important that measure to assist fish passage are designed to not facilitate the introduced trout to move upstream. 32. A fish ladder/ spat rope is proposed at the northern spillway below the reservoir. Again it is important that fish passage measures here are designed to facilitate indigenous fish movement especially bullies, and not introduced trout to move upstream.

5.3.4 Sediment retention 33. It is suggested that the proposed viewing platform, if installed (subject to approval from DOC) at the upper end of the northern reservoir be designed to act as a sediment trap. This will reduce sediment input into the reservoir, preserving adequate water depths to maintain good water quality. Colluvial sediment erosion is very active in the upper catchment of Mitchell Steam, and it expected that sediment inputs into the freshwater habitat will continue to be high, despite changes to vegetation cover.

pg. 55

5.3.5 Felling of live and dead pine and macrocarpa trees 34. Porirua Adventure Park Limited propose to fell 20-30 large pine and macrocarpa trees in the vicinity of the proposed gondola cable in the northeast corner of RCKSR for public health and safety and fire risk reasons. Most are standing dead (poisoned) trees, but some are living. These trees occur at one end of a spur extending northeast from the top part of TRoR. Outside of areas which need to be felled for health and safety reasons, leaving trees to die in-situ, which is the most cost effective control method, presents long-term future health and safety risks to park users, as well as being unsightly at least in the short to medium-term. In addition to this, it is recommend that as part of this mitigation package, Porirua Adventure Park Limited will facilitate felling of further pine and macrocarpa trees further up the spur, for example by making felling crews available and logistic assistance to a coordinated felling programme. It is proposed that a large poplar tree in Mitchell Stream above the northern reservoir in the RCKSR is removed, to facilitate indigenous forest regeneration.

5.3.6 Monitoring 35. Ecological aspects proposed for monitoring within the application site over a three year period from the time the consent is obtained include: ▪ Bird strike (indigenous species only) – incidence of fatal bird encounters with the gondola and zipline, and the response to measures to reduce strike (should this be necessary); ▪ Bird population changes – relative density or index changes from the baseline established as part of this assessment; ▪ Health of the banded kokopu population above the northern reservoir, and the continued absence of trout; ▪ Presence of new pest plant incursions (species and locations) at the Tower bases, zip line ends and along the trails; ▪ Survival and growth rate of plants at the revegetation site; ▪ Success in the prompt removal of pest plant incursions; ▪ Possum and rat population changes – relative density or index changes pre-control and annually to assess effectiveness of control.

pg. 56

Figure 12: Mitigation proposed for Porirua Adventure Park – indicative sites for revegetation and pest animal control

pg. 57

References

Begg JG, Johnston MR. Geology of the Wellington area. 1: 250000 Geological map 10. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, Lower Hutt, New Zealand. 2000.

Begg, JG, Mazengarb C 1996. Geology of the Wellington Area. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Geological Map 22, 1:50 000.

Blaschke et al 2009. Porira ctm.

Boffa Miskell 2000. Porirua SES survey

Bruce JG 2000: The soils of Wellington. Pp 93-121 in: McConchie, J, Winchester, D and Willis R eds. Dynamic Wellington: a contemporary synthesis and exploration of Wellington. Institute of Geography, Victoria University of Wellington.

Chappell PR 2014. The climate and weather of Wellington. 2nd edition. NIWA Science and Technology Series 65.

Department of Conservation 2010. Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve: factsheet. Available on http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/parks-and-recreation/places-to- visit/wellington/colonial-knob-factsheet.pdf

Department of Conservation 2012 Bird survey methods - Birds: incomplete counts— five- minute bird counts. Version 1.0. Birds: incomplete counts— line transect counts. Version 1.0

Department of Conservation 1996: Conservation Management Strategy for Wellington 1996– 2005. Wellington, Department of Conservation. (1). 283 pp.

Department of Conservation 2016. Draft Wellington Conservation Management Strategy 2016- 2026. Department of Conservation, Wellington.

EIANZ 2015. Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) EIANZ guidelines for use in New Zealand: terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems.

ENGEO 2018a. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Evaluation, Porirua Western Hills, Porirua. Wellington.

ENGEO 2018b. Preliminary Environmental Site Investigation, Porirua Western Hills, Porirua. Wellington.

Gabites I 2002. Eco-domains for the Wellington region: processes and patterns for defining diversity and distinctiveness. Greater Wellington Regional Council, Wellington.

Greater Wellington Regional Council. 2015. Key Native Ecosystem Plan Porirua Western Forests. Greater Wellington Regional Council, Wellington. GW/BD-G-15/157

Greater Wellington Regional Council 2016. Identifying and protecting significant indigenous biodiversity in the Wellington region. GW/BD-G-16/51.

pg. 58

Hedley, M.D. 1997. An assessment of risks associated with use of CCA-treated timber in sensitive environments and options for its substitution with alternative timber materials. New Zealand Forest Research Institute, Rotorua.

Heine JC 1975. Interim report on soils of Wellington Region, New Zealand. NZ Soil Bureau Record 39. DSIR, Wellington.

Leathwick JR, Wilson G, Rutledge G, Wardle P, Morgan F, Johnston K, McLeod M, Kirkpatrick R. Land environments of New Zealand. David Bateman; 2002.

McArthur, N., Harvey A, and Flux I. 2015, State and trends in the diversity, abundance and distribution of birds in Wellington City.

McEwen WM 1987. Ecological regions and districts of New Zealand. 3rd rev. ed in four 1:500 000 maps. - Wellington, N.Z., Dept. of Conservation.

Murray B 2006. An historical atlas of Tawa. Tawa Historical Society.

NIWA 2018. Fish Atlas Database Records. Available on https://www.niwa.co.nz/freshwater- and-estuaries/nzffd/NIWA-fish-atlas/fish-species/

Offer R 1997. Walls of water: pioneer dam building in New Zealand. Dunmore Press, Palmerston North.

Penman N and Penman J 2015: A portrait of Porirua: the creation of a planned city. The Penmanship Press, Porirua.

Porirua City Council 1994. Porirua Scenic Reserve Management Plan. Porirua City Council, Porirua

Porirua City Council 2013. Porirua City Management Plan and Bylaw. Porirua City Council, Porirua. Available on http://www.reservefinder.co.nz/reserve/porirua.scenic.reserve

Salinger MJ 2000: The windy city? A climate of contrast. Pp 75-91 in: McConchie J, Winchester D and Willis R eds. Dynamic Wellington: a contemporary synthesis and exploration of Wellington. Institute of Geography, Victoria University of Wellington.

Singers NJ, Rogers G 2014: A classification of New Zealand’s terrestrial ecosystems. Science for Conservation 325. Department of Conservation, Wellington. 87 p.

Storey RG, Neale MW, Rowe DK, Collier KJ, Hatton C, Joy MK, Maxted JR, Moore S, Parkyn SM, Phillips N, Quinn JM 2011. Stream Ecological Valuation (SEV): a method for assessing the ecological function of Auckland streams. Auckland Council Technical Report 2011/009.

Tonkin & Taylor Ltd 2017. Spicer Landfill Annual Report 2016-17. Report for Porirua City Council. Tonkin and Taylor Ltd 2017.

Wildland Consultants 2014. Assessment of potential ecological effects for mountain bike routes proposed for Rangituhi-Colonial Knob, Porirua. Wildland Consultants Ltd Contract Report No. 3437. Prepared for Porirua City Council, Wellington. 67 p.

pg. 59

Williams WH 1987. “Out of mind, out of sight”: the story of Porirua Hospital. Porirua Hospital, Porirua.

pg. 60

Appendix 1: Vegetation and habitat descriptions

Adapted from Wildlands 2014

Table 1.1: Vegetation types, and their stature within the Rangituhi/western reserves area

Veg. Type No. Vegetation Type 1 Tawa-kohekohe-(podocarp) forest 2 Tawa-mahoe-(podocarp) forest 3 Tawa-mahoe forest 4 Mahoe-(tawa) forest 5 Mahoe forest 6 Exotic conifer-dominated forest 7 Exotic broadleaved dominated forest 8 Higher altitude scrub 9 Mahoe-gorse scrub 10 Gorse scrub 11 Exotic scrub 12 Indigenous shrubland 13 Pasture grassland

1 Tawa-kohekohe-(podocarp) forest This vegetation type predominantly occurs in the low altitude stream gullies and on some of the lower slopes. Tawa (Beilschmiedia tawa) and kohekohe (Dysoxylum spectabile) can be up to 20 m tall, although this height reduces to about 10 m at the top of this vegetation type. Matai (Prumnopitys taxifolia) and totara (Podocarpus totara var. totara) are found on the base of the slopes. Tall rewarewa (Knightia excelsa) are emergent on some upper slopes and spurs, while several large buttressed pukatea (Laurelia novae-zelandiae) are located in valley bottoms. Karaka (Corynocarpus laevigatus) occurs locally especially near some of the reserve edges. Nikau (Rhopalostylis sapida) are locally common in the understorey. Trees are generally widely spaced (4-5 m) with a variety of understorey and vine species occupying the space beneath.

Understorey species include māhoe (Melicytus ramiflorus subsp. ramiflorus), rangiora (Brachyglottis repanda), kawakawa (Macropiper excelsum subsp. excelsum), lancewood (Pseudopanax crassifolius), hangehange (Geniostoma ligustrifolium var. ligustrifolium), karamu (Coprosma robusta), Coprosma rhamnoides, kanono (Coprosma grandifolia), putaputawētā (Carpodetus serratus) and wharangi (Melicope ternata). Around the streams there is a diversity of ferns including four tree ferns; silver fern (Cyathea dealbata), mamaku (Cyathea medullaris), kātote (Cyathea smithii), and whekī (Dicksonia squarrosa); as well as a great diversity of Asplenium, Blechnum and other genera of ferns. Supplejack (Ripogonum scandens), kiekie (Freycinetia banksii), kohia (Passiflora tetrandra), and native honeysuckle vines (Parsonsia sp.) occur frequently and various rata (Metrosideros sp.) and Clematis species wind their way up in to the canopy.

2 Tawa-mahoe-(podocarp) forest On the higher slopes and ridges the environment is drier and kohekohe is often replaced by mahoe. Rewarewa is often emergent and ngaio (Myoporum laetum) can be locally common in the canopy. Forest height ranges from about 6-10 m. Spacing between trees is somewhat less than Vegetation Type 1 (3-4 m). Matai (Prumnopitys taxifolia), miro (Prumnopitys ferruginea) and totara (Podocarpus totara var. totara) are found on a number of the drier ridges. The understorey is also not as rich and contains more smaller-leaved species or species with thick leaves such as mingimingi (Leucopogon fasciculatus), māpou (Myrsine australis) five finger (Pseudopanax

pg. 61

arboreus), mingimingi (Coprosma propinqua var. propinqua), Coprosma rhamnoides, wharangi (Melicope ternata), wineberry (Aristotelia serrata), rangiora and Coprosma areolata.

3 Tawa-mahoe forest This is midslope forest that is somewhat similar in composition to Vegetation Type 2 but has been subject to more disturbance and in many areas has regenerated from essentially cleared land. It is shorter in stature (5-8 m) than type 2, tree spacing is reduced to 2-3 m, lacks a podocarp element in the canopy or upper understorey, although podocarp seedlings or saplings are present in some places. Canopy species can have a very wind-swept appearance. Tawa and mahoe both dominate the canopy in different places. Additional species include pigeonwood (Hedycarya arborea), kaikomako (Pennantia corymbosa), lacebark (Hoheria populnea), ramarama (Lophomyrtus bullata), lancewood (in some cases present as very large specimens), five-finger (Pseudopanax arboreus), rangiora and some sizable kāpuka (Griselinia littoralis). Occasional kōhūhū (Pittosporum tenuifolium), mamaku, and wharangi (Melicope ternata) also occur. Ferns are generally the thicker-leaved species such as shining spleenwort (Asplenium oblongifolium), sickle spleenwort (Asplenium polyodon) and Blechnum species.

4 Mahoe-(tawa) forest This forest type occurs in patches on the upper slopes of southern Porirua Scenic Reserve and on some of the side-slopes within Colonial Knob Scenic reserve. The main canopy is 4-6 m tall mahoe with common mamaku and occasional tawa. Kiekie may be prominent in the ground layers. Spacing between trees is reduced to 2-3 m. Other species are as per Vegetation Type 3.

5 Mahoe scrub and forest Mahoe-dominated scrub and forest occurs mainly in Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve. This is a relatively young vegetation type with trees mainly up to about 3 m in height, rising to about 6 m in places, with spacing between trees of one to two metres. It contains a similar range of species as per Vegetation Type 3. The sub-canopy and understorey contain many smaller broadleaved tree species including mamaku, kawakawa, hangehange, kanono (Coprosma grandifolia), pate (Schefflera digitata), akiraho (Olearia paniculata), heketara(O. rani), and pōhuehue (Muehlenbeckia complexa) scrambling over margins and canopy openings. Tawa, kohekohe and rewarewa seedlings and saplings are common in places. 6 Exotic conifer-dominated forest Exotic conifer forest occurs mainly on Colonial Knob Parkland with some areas on Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve. The exotic conifer species are mainly Pinus radiata with smaller areas of macrocarpa (Cupressus macrocarpa). This vegetation type can include pockets of exotic broadleaved species (Vegetation Type 7). The understorey varies according to the age of the stand and the light penetration.

Within the Parkland many areas are covered in dense pine needles with treeferns, early colonising Coprosma and fern species clustered around stream gullies or in light wells. Spacing between trees is generally 3-5 m. Where the canopy is more open mahoe and ground ferns can be common. Blackberry (Rubus sp. (R. fruticosus agg.)) can be locally very dense in canopy openings.

Some of the pine and macrocarpa stands within the Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve have been poisoned where they pose no risk to track users. Here an indigenous understorey has quickly dominated and includes mahoe and wineberry (Aristotelia serrata), mamaku, rangiora, pate, heketara, supplejack, kanono, and putaputaweta (Carpodetus serratus). Spacing between trees is around 1 m.

pg. 62

7 Exotic broadleaved-dominated forest Exotic broadleaved forest mainly comprises Eucalyptus species. The most widely planted are shining gum (Eucalyptus nitens) and tallowwood (Eucalyptus microcorys) with smaller areas of rose gum (Eucalyptus grandis) and Tasmanian blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon). Spacing between trees generally ranges from 3-5 m. In wet gullies and in areas of slips hoary willow (Salix elaeagnos) or poplar species have been planted.

This vegetation type can include small patches of conifers. In open areas the understorey comprises pasture grassland. Where the canopy is denser short-stature mahoe, karamu and ground ferns can be locally common.

8 Higher altitude scrub Many of the areas described as pasture grassland in 1986 (Wassilieff et al. 1986) have been colonised by indigenous scrub. At higher altitudes within Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve this comprises low growing (½-3 m tall) kāpuka, koromiko (Hebe stricta var. atkinsonii), tauhinu (Ozothamnus leptophyllus), mahoe, rangiora, kōtukutuku (Fuchsia excorticata) with some dense areas of kiekie. Other canopy species include mamaku, lancewood, coastal shrub daisy Olearia solandri), Coprosma rhamnoides, hangehange, and kakaha (Astelia fragrans). Bracken (Pteridium esculentum), various species of rātā (Metrosideros diffusa, M. fulgens, M. perforata) and other vines (Muehlenbeckia australis, Muehlenbeckia complexa, Rubus australis, and Rubus cissoides agg.) scramble through the vegetation. Hounds tongue fern (Microsorum pustulatum), shield fern (Polystichum silvaticum) and bidibidi (Acaena novae-zelandiae) occur in the understorey and in the patches of rank pasture grassland. 9 Mahoe-gorse scrub Most of the areas of gorse (Ulex europaeus) within the reserves, where not heavily grazed, actually comprise equal mahoe and gorse in the canopy with a range of other indigenous species. These species include māpou, rangiora, putaputaweta, pigeonwood, lancewood, five finger, Coprosma propinqua var. propinqua, Coprosma rhamnoides, wharangi, wineberry, and Coprosma areolata. The height of this vegetation type ranges from 2-4 m and stem spacing is generally very dense. The margins of this vegetation type can have a 2 m wide edge of nearly pure gorse.

10 Gorse-dominated scrub Gorse scrub occurs on the upper and some mid-slopes of Colonial Knob Parkland and there are small pockets along the upper edges of the Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve. Gorse is the predominant species but indigenous species can occur in the canopy and understorey. The most common species are tauhinu, mahoe, mamaku, rangiora, kanono, karamu, Coprosma rhamnoides, shield fern, hound’s tongue fern and bidibidi. This scrub type is generally up to about 2-3 m tall with tight stem densities in places, although decreasing as the indigenous components increase.

11 Exotic scrub There are small areas of exotic scrub where a range of non-indigenous species co-dominate; species such as gorse, broom (Cytisus scoparius), Spanish heath (Erica lusitanica), karo (not native to Wellington, Pittosporum crassifolium), and blackberry. This vegetation type can include occasional mahoe, kanono, karamu, rangiora and other indigenous species and individuals or small stands of exotic conifers or broadleaved trees.

12 Indigenous shrubland Indigenous shrubland occurs along the margins of Vegetation Type 8 Higher altitude scrub. Most of these areas are within the currently grazed zone. The canopy varies from 20-60% closed, the height varies from ½-2 m tall, and the predominant understorey is pasture grassland.

pg. 63

13 Pasture grassland A range of predominantly exotic pasture grass species occur including browntop (Agrostis capillaris), creeping bent (Agrostis stolonifera), sweet vernal (Anthoxanthum odoratum), Yorkshire fog (Holcus lanatus), annual poa (Poa annua), and tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus). In places the grass is quite rank. On upper and rocky areas, grasses are somewhat more sparse and can also include native silver tussock (Poa cita) as well as pātōtara (Leucopogon fraseri), bidibidi and other small indigenous herbs.

pg. 64

Appendix 2: Calculations for Vegetation Clearance for Proposed Trails

Lengths of trails:

Vegetation Type (Length m) Total Length Trail # Trail Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 (m) Porirua Scenic Reserve 6 EASY FLOW TRAIL 1,067 384 81 6 1,538 8 INTERMEDIATE FLOW TRAIL 417 64 481 Te Rahui o Rangituhi Reserve

2,307 6 294 977 6 1,030 8 INTERMEDIATE FLOW TRAIL 1,397 60 468 1,925 8a BLASTER CONNECTOR 277 13 498 788 12 SUMMIT TRAVERSE 50 508 2,074 2,632 13 BLUE JUMP 1 605 344 12 803 1,764 14 ENDURO DECENT 96 48 1,742 1,886 15 BLUE TECHNICAL 490 490

1,805 16 DOWNHILL LOOP 1,014 578 214 17 ROCKET MAN 151 6 99 500 756 18 BLACK DOWNHILL 1 151 151 19 BLACK DOWNHILL 2 213 213 20 BLACK DOWNHILL 3 119 119 21 DOWNHILL RACE TRACK 16 198 214 22 BLUE TECHNICAL 1 112 795 907 23 BLUE TECHNICAL 2 81 177 1,259 1,517 24 BLUE TECHNICAL 3 102 353 455 25 BLUE TECHNICAL 4 203 203 27 SPICER LINK WALKING TRAIL 378 94 472 29 TUMEKE TO SPICER LINK TRAIL 273 273 30 TOP STATION TO ZIPLINE 294 294 31 TOP STATION WALKWAY 541 541 Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve pg. 65

Vegetation Type (Length m) Total Length Trail # Trail Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 (m)

RESERVOIR ACCESIBLE LOOP 418 7 (NO BIKES) 418 14 ENDURO DECENT 522 8 145 133 808 16 DOWNHILL LOOP 123 6 73 201 21 DOWNHILL RACE TRACK 24 24 RESERVOIR LOOP ACCESSIBLE 105 28 SECTION 105 Spicer Botanical Park 27 SPICER LINK WALKING TRAIL 52 52 TOTALS 522 1,484 392 2,154 3,264 3,691 219 230 1,027 1,824 8,532 23,339

pg. 66

Areas of vegetation proposed for clearance:

Vegetation Type (Area m2) Total Area Trail # Trail Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 (m2) Porirua Scenic Reserve 6 EASY FLOW TRAIL 2,797 959 214 29 3,999 8 INTERMEDIATE FLOW TRAIL 750 116 866 Te Rahui o Rangituhi Reserve

765 2,541 15 5,998 6 2,677 8 INTERMEDIATE FLOW TRAIL 2,515 107 843 3,465 8a BLASTER CONNECTOR 498 24 897 1,418 12 SUMMIT TRAVERSE 90 914 3,734 4,738 13 BLUE JUMP 1 472 269 9 626 1,376 14 ENDURO DECENT 105 53 1,916 2,074 15 BLUE TECHNICAL 382 382 16 DOWNHILL LOOP 791 451 167 1,408 17 ROCKET MAN 118 5 78 390 590 18 BLACK DOWNHILL 1 118 118 19 BLACK DOWNHILL 2 145 145 20 BLACK DOWNHILL 3 93 93 21 DOWNHILL RACE TRACK 13 154 167 22 BLUE TECHNICAL 1 88 620 708 23 BLUE TECHNICAL 2 63 138 982 1,183 24 BLUE TECHNICAL 3 80 275 355 25 BLUE TECHNICAL 4 158 158 27 SPICER LINK WALKING TRAIL 453 113 566 29 TUMEKE TO SPICER LINK TRAIL 328 328 30 TOP STATION TO ZIPLINE 353 353

pg. 67

Vegetation Type (Area m2) Total Area Trail # Trail Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 (m2) 31 TOP STATION WALKWAY 649 649 Rangituhi/Colonial Knob Scenic Reserve

RESERVOIR ACCESIBLE LOOP 502 502 7 (NO BIKES) 14 ENDURO DECENT 573 9 160 145 887 16 DOWNHILL LOOP 96 4 57 157 21 DOWNHILL RACE TRACK 19 19

RESERVOIR LOOP ACCESSIBLE 126 126 28 SECTION Spicer Botanical Park

27 SPICER LINK WALKING TRAIL 63 63 TOTALS 573 3,547 968 1,948 3,219 6,542 252 470 1,344 3,297 10,730 32,891

pg. 68

Appendix 3: Scientific names of plant species in text

Aluminum weed* Galeobdolon lutum Arum lily* Zantedeschia aethiopica Bear’s breeches* Acanthus mollis Black beech Fuscospora solandri Black orchid Gastrodia cunninghamii Blackberry* Rubus fruticosus Cabbage tree Cordyline australis Cape ivy* Senecio angulatus Climbing asparagus* Asparagus scandens Crack willow* Salix fragilis Corokia Corokia spp. Dock (climbing)* Rumex sagitatus Douglas fir* Pseudotsuga menziesii Elaeagnus vine* Elaeagnus x reflexa Ivy* Hedera helix Eucalyptus/gums* Eucalyptus ficifolia, Eucalyptus/gums* Eucalyptus botryoides Eucalyptus/gums* Eucalyptus delegatensis Eucalyptus/gums* Eucalyptus fraxinoides Eucalyptus/gums* Eucalyptus nitens Eucalyptus/gums* Eucalyptus obliqua Eucalyptus/gums* Eucalyptus pauciflora European oak* Quercus robur Filmy fern Adiantum diaphanum Filmy fern Adiantum fulvum Filmy fern Adiantum viridescens Five finger Pseudopanax arboreus Fleshy tree orchid Drymoanthus adversus Flowering cherry* Prunus serrulata German ivy* Senecio mikanioides Greater bindweed* Calystegia sylvatica Greenhood orchid Pterostylis porrecta Hinau Eleaocarpus dentatus Hounds tongue Microsorum novae-zealandiae Japanese honeysuckle* Lonicera japonica Jasmine * Jasminum polyanthum kahikatea Dacrycarpus dacrydioides Kamahi Weinmannia racemosa Kanuka Kunzea ericoides Karamu Coprosma robusta koromiko tāranga Veronica parviflora Karo** Pittosporum crassifolium Kāpuka/broadleaf Griselinia littoralis Kiekie Freycinetia banksii

pg. 69

Kohekohe Dysoxylum spectabile Kowhai* Sophora (principally S. microphylla) Lacebark Hoheria populnea Larch* Larix decidua Lebanon cedar* Cedrus libani Lombardy poplar* Populus nigra Mahoe Melycytus ramiflorus Mamaku Cyathea medullaris Manuka Leptospermum scoparium Matai Prumnopitys taxifolia Milkwood tree Streblus banksii Miro Prumnopitys ferruginea Montbretia Crocosmia x crocosmiiflora Nikau Rhopalostylis sapida Northern rata Metrosideros robusta Old man’s beard* Clematis vitalba Onion weed* Allium triquetum Perching lily Astelia spp. Phoenix palm* Phoenix canariensis Pittosporum Pittosporum spp. [native] Porokaiwhiri/pigeon wood Hedycarya arborea Pukatea Laurelia novae-zelandiae Rangiora Brachyglottis repanda Raukawa Pseudopanax edgerleyii Redwood* Metasequoia glyptostroboides Rewarewa Knightia excelsa Rimu Dacrydium cupressinum Shining teatree/Australian manuka* Leptospernum Copper sheen Silver beech Fuscospora menziesii Silver wattle* Acacia dealbata Spanish heath* Erica lusitanica Stinking iris* Iris foetidissima Strawberry tree * Arbutus unedo Swamp she-oak* Casuarina glauca Sycamore* Acer pseudoplatanus Tauhinu Ozothamnus leptophyllus Tasmanian blackwood* Acacia melanoxylon Tawa Beilschmiedia tawa Titoki Alectryon excelsus Totara Podocarpus totara Tradescantia* Tradescantia fluminensis Wattle (brush wattle)* Paraserianthes lophantha White pampas* Cortaderia selloana Wild ginger* Hedychium gardnerianum

* Naturalised (non-native) species ** Native to New Zealand but not to Wellington Ecological District

pg. 70

Proposed Template for an Ecological Management Plan

Title

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

Overview of works

Purpose and scope of plan

Relationship with other consent plans

2.0 Assessment of environmental effects

2.1 Summary from the AEcE

Summary of AEcE report

2.2 Ecological values

Summary table of ecological values

2.3 Effects assessment

Summary table of ecological effects

2.4 Proposed actions of avoid, remedy and mitigate

Summary table of proposed actions of avoid, remedy and mitigate as per the application

3.0 Consent conditions

Outline relevant consent conditions (summarize in a table)

4.0 Management of construction effects

4.1 Detailed design

Outline the process to include ecological issues in the detailed design phase (ecologist input into design meetings, comments on design – design of physical build and construction processes, sign-off from ecologist of design documentation)

4.2 Construction phase

List tasks to be taken during construction to manage ecological effects – what, when, resourcing, responsibility (who), monitoring and reporting Details of how tasks will be implemented These would include but not limited to: pg. 1

Biosecurity pathways Setting up, implementing and monitoring biosecurity pathways control – controls to avoid introduction of weed seeds, phytosanitary procedures

Pest animal control Set-up of rat control prior to construction commencing – include performance measure to meet for rat population levels, pre-operational population audit, methods, resourcing & timing of control

Pest plant control Survey pest plant infestations, undertake control of pest plants at construction sites prior to construction commencing, establish pest plant population density performance measures, methods, resourcing & timing of control

Vegetation clearance Final survey at sites proposed for clearance to mark trees to be avoided for clearance, measures in place to protect tree trunks and roots where necessary. Mark and supervise trees that will be stockpiled (logs and foliage), and sites where stockpiles will be set up for lizard recovery. Oversee timing of mulching of stockpiled vegetation – 1-3 months after clearance Identify whether any large trees within clearance sites may provide roost or nest sites for long-tailed bats to ensure their clearance is avoided, of if this cannot be done, then provide assurance that bats are not present.

Earthworks & sediment control Monitor earthwork control measures during construction to direct stockpiling of excavated sediment away from sensitive vegetation Monitor stockpiled sediment and bare surfaces for run-off to streams and the reservoir, and to ensure that measures to minimise sediment run-off are in place and effective Monitor for the reinstatement of vegetation on bare surfaces in accordance with the measures specified in the Earthworks Plan (this may include planting of low-growing indigenous vegetation, grass and/or mulching with suitable material)

Fish passage Monitor the construction of the culvert at the existing ford to ensure design specifications are being meet that allow for fish passage Oversee the installation of spat rope at the ford/culvert (if necessary) and the spillway below the reservoirs to ensure it meets design specifications (that allows passage for bullies but not trout)

Accidental discoveries Outline process of how accidental discoveries or disturbance of indigenous flora and fauna will be handled.

4.3 Post-construction phase

List tasks to be taken immediate post-construction to ensure all actions to be undertaken have been completed during the construction phase Audit process to ‘tick-off’ all requirements Reporting to consenting authority that construction consent conditions have been met – what, when and who

Post-construction tasks would include but not limited to:

▪ Checking that cleared vegetation is appropriately disposed of ▪ Appropriate vegetation has or is establishing on bare surfaces ▪ Identifying any weeds that have established at construction sites, and including their control in operational tasks ▪ Ensuring that the rodent control is being undertaken in accordance with specified requirements pg. 2

▪ Erosion control measures remain in place where sediment control is still required ▪ The fish passage measures are in place as designed and operational ▪ Undertaking an audit of the proceeding measures and preparing a report to Council on compliance with construction consent conditions.

5.0 Management of operational effects

Operational phase (note that some of these tasks can commence concurrently at the time of construction) List tasks to be taken during operation of the facilities/structure to manage ecological effects – what, when, resourcing, responsibility (who), monitoring and reporting Details of how tasks will be implemented Reporting to consenting authority that operational consent conditions have been met – what, when and who

These would include but not limited to:

Revegetation (of the proposed 2ha site) Establish how the revegetation at the site will proceed – specify revegetation objectives, performance measures – such as planting density, time to canopy closure, survival rate of plantings, and pre-planting site preparation, plant species and numbers, sequencing of planting, post-planting care, mulching and fertilizer requirements How rabbit and hare control will be undertaken to protect young plants Monitoring establishment of plantings – specify methods of who plant establishment and growth will be monitored to meet performance standards.

Biosecurity pathways Continue to implementand monitor biosecurity pathways – controls to avoid introduction of weed seeds, phytosanitary procedures. Implementation of a programme to monitor for weed establishment along trails and other disturbed surfaces related to the operation of the facility. Processes to collaborate with other agencies (PCC, DOC, GWRC) over managing biosecurity pathways.

Pest animal control Set-up and implementation of possum control– include performance measure to meet for possum population levels, pre- operational population audit, methods, resourcing & timing of control Continue with rat control Regular audits of possum and rat population to ensure population performance measures are being meet, and that control methods meet standards specified. Processes to collaborate with other agencies (PCC, DOC, GWRC) and groups (such as the MCC) over pest animal control programmes.

Pest plant control From the pest plant surveys, develop and implement a targeted pest plant control programme with the aim of reducing pest plants along trials and other disturbed surfaces (include a buffer of say 20m) to zero density. Processes to collaborate with other agencies (PCC, DOC, GWRC) and other groups over pest plant control programmes. Regular audits of pest plant population in the target areas to ensure population performance measures are being meet, and that control methods meet standards specified.

Dog control Processes to collaborate with PCC and DOC to control dog access.

Bird strike and entanglement Set up processes to gather information, collate records and analyze data on bird entanglements or strikes with the gondola and zipline. Report on results to the relevant agencies (DOC, PCC), and if unacceptable levels of deaths or injuries the describe process to investigate causes and measures to reduce these deaths etc.

Monitoring bird populations pg. 3

Specify how bird populations will be monitored – propose that this follow the methodology used for the AEcE, reusing the bird count stations, and replicating conditions when the counts took place. Propose that this occurs in 3 then 6 years from the time of consent issue.

Vegetation trimming Specify how vegetation along the trials and at the gondola and zipline towers will be trimmed to keep these areas clear of overhanging vegetation. For example, trimming will include only the removal of branches, and entire trees will only be considered for removal if there are concerns regarding tree stability, the immediate safety of the structures, or human health and safety.

Reporting An annual progress report will be compiled each year of operation of the consent for two purposes:

▪ for the consent authority to provide an overview of achievements for the year and measure progress to meeting consent conditions ▪ for facility management to provide them with confidence that the ecological management programme is proceeding with success.

6.0 Review of the Plan

Specify review process and date – to take account of new management methods or unanticipated ecological effects.

7.0 Summary

Summary table showing for each phase of the project – tasks, resources (budget, hours, equipment), timing, responsibility, risks, dependencies, performance standards, relate to consent conditions or objectives of project proposal

8.0 Appendices

Maps – overall sites, management areas Procedures and standards – such as for pest animal and plant control, biosecurity pathways (hygiene procedures), fauna monitoring, vegetation monitoring, ecosystem condition and health – terrestrial and aquatic Templates – data gathering (in the field), data management, reporting, audit checklists

pg. 4