DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecological Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ecological Assessment 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.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Summary of Native Bat, Reptile, Amphibian and Terrestrial Invertebrate Translocations in New Zealand
    Summary of native bat, reptile, amphibian and terrestrial invertebrate translocations in New Zealand SCIENCE FOR CONSERVATION 303 Summary of native bat, reptile, amphibian and terrestrial invertebrate translocations in New Zealand G.H. Sherley, I.A.N. Stringer and G.R. Parrish SCIENCE FOR CONSERVATION 303 Published by Publishing Team Department of Conservation PO Box 10420, The Terrace Wellington 6143, New Zealand Cover: Male Mercury Islands tusked weta, Motuweta isolata. Originally found on Atiu or Middle Island in the Mercury Islands, these were translocated onto six other nearby islands after being bred in captivity. Photo: Ian Stringer. Science for Conservation is a scientific monograph series presenting research funded by New Zealand Department of Conservation (DOC). Manuscripts are internally and externally peer-reviewed; resulting publications are considered part of the formal international scientific literature. Individual copies are printed, and are also available from the departmental website in pdf form. Titles are listed in our catalogue on the website, refer www.doc.govt.nz under Publications, then Science & technical. © Copyright April 2010, New Zealand Department of Conservation ISSN 1173–2946 (hardcopy) ISSN 1177–9241 (PDF) ISBN 978–0–478–14771–1 (hardcopy) ISBN 978–0–478–14772–8 (PDF) This report was prepared for publication by the Publishing Team; editing by Amanda Todd and layout by Hannah Soult. Publication was approved by the General Manager, Research and Development Group, Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand. In the interest of forest conservation, we support paperless electronic publishing. When printing, recycled paper is used wherever possible. CONTENTS Abstract 5 1. Introduction 6 2. Methods 7 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Section Introduction
    Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 RE-INTRODUCTION PRACTITIONERS DIRECTORY 1998 Compiled and Edited by Pritpal S. Soorae and Philip J. Seddon Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 © National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development, 1998 Printing and Publication details Legal Deposit no. 2218/9 ISBN: 9960-614-08-5 Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 Copies of this directory are available from: The Secretary General National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development Post Box 61681, Riyadh 11575 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Phone: +966-1-441-8700 Fax: +966-1-441-0797 Bibliographic Citation: Soorae, P. S. and Seddon, P. J. (Eds). 1998. Re-introduction Practitioners Directory. Published jointly by the IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Re-introduction Specialist Group, Nairobi, Kenya, and the National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 97pp. Cover Photo: Arabian Oryx Oryx leucoryx (NWRC Photo Library) Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 CONTENTS FOREWORD Professor Abdulaziz Abuzinadai PREFACE INTRODUCTION Dr Mark Stanley Price USING THE DIRECTORY ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PART A. ANIMALS I MOLLUSCS 1. GASTROPODS 1.1 Cittarium pica Top Shell 1.2 Placostylus ambagiosus Flax Snail 1.3 Placostylus ambagiosus Land Snail 1.4 Partula suturalis 1.5 Partula taeniata 1.6 Partula tahieana 1.7 Partula tohiveana 2. BIVALVES 2.1 Freshwater Mussels 2.2 Tridacna gigas Giant Clam II ARTHROPODS 3. ORTHOPTERA 3.1 Deinacrida sp. Weta 3.2 Deinacrida rugosa/parva Cook’s Strait Giant Weta Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 3.3 Gryllus campestris Field Cricket 4. LEPIDOPTERA 4.1 Carterocephalus palaemon Chequered Skipper 4.2 Lycaena dispar batavus Large Copper 4.3 Lycaena helle 4.4 Lycaeides melissa 4.5 Papilio aristodemus ponoceanus Schaus Swallowtail 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Wellington Green Gecko Advocacy: Assessing Awareness & Willingness
    Wellington Green Gecko Advocacy: Assessing Awareness & Willingness An Interactive Qualifying Project submitted to the Faculty of Worcester Polytechnic Institute in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in cooperation with Wellington Zoo. Submitted on March 3, 2017 Submitted By: Submitted to: Calvin Chen Daniela Biaggio James Doty Emilia Murray Michael Eaton Wellington Zoo Derrick Naugler Project Advisors: Professor Dominic Golding Professor Ingrid Shockey This report represents the work of four WPI undergraduate students submitted to the faculty as evidence of completion of a degree requirement. WPI routinely publishes these reports on its website without editorial or peer review. For more information about the projects, please see http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Project i Abstract Due to the large proportion of native lizard species currently considered at risk or threatened, Wellington Zoo aimed to better understand public attitudes and awareness regarding the Wellington Green Gecko and New Zealand lizards in general. To assist the zoo, we surveyed the general public and interviewed both herpetological and conservation experts. Through these methods, we determined that the public lacks awareness of native lizards but has a high willingness to engage in conservation regarding geckos. From this data, we developed a public service announcement and a series of recommendations, focused on improving the public’s knowledge of native lizards, which Wellington Zoo can implement to foster gecko conservation in Wellington. ii Executive summary Figure A: The Wellington Green Gecko (Doty, 2017) The Wellington Green Gecko (shown in Figure A), Naultinus Elegans Punctatus, is a medium sized lizard that can measure up to approximately 200 mm in length and can be identified by its bright green back, white or yellow spots along its dorsal region and a vivid blue mouth lining (Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, n.d.).
    [Show full text]
  • Oceania Species ID Sheets
    Species Identification Sheets for Protected Wildlife in Trade - Oceania - 3 Mark O’Shea 1 Mike McCoy © Phil Bender 5 Tony Whitaker © 2 4 Tony Whitaker © 6 WILDLIFE ENFORCEMENT GROUP (AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY · CONSERVATION · N. Z. CUSTOMS SERVICE) Numbered images above Crown Copyright: Department of Conservation Te Papa Atawhai. Photographers:1) Dick Veitch 1981, 2) Rod Morris 1984, 3) Gareth Rapley 2009, 4) Andrew Townsend 2000, 5) Paul Schilov 2001, 6) Dick Veitch 1979 Introduction Purpose of this resource: - Additional species that should be included in this booklet Wildlife trafficking is a large-scale multi-billion dollar industry worldwide. The illegal trade of - Sources of information, such as identification guides or reports, related to these wildlife has reached such prominence that it has the potential to devastate source populations species of wildlife, impacting on the integrity and productivity of ecosystems in providing food and - Domestic legislation regarding the regulation of trade in wildlife - Sources of photographs for identification purposes resources to the local economy. In order to protect these resources, legislation has been put in place to control the trade of wildlife in almost every country worldwide. Those assigned with - Details of wildlife seizures, including the smuggling methods enforcing these laws have the monumental task of identifying the exact species that are being traded, either as whole living plants or animals, as parts that are dried, fried or preserved, or as Any feedback can be provided directly to the Wildlife Enforcement Group: derivatives contained within commercial products. Stuart Williamson Senior Investigator, Wildlife Enforcement Group This booklet “Species Identification Sheets for Protected Species in Trade – Oceania” has been Customhouse, Level 6, 50 Anzac Avenue, Auckland, New Zealand developed to address the lack of resources, identified by customs agencies within Oceania, for Ph: +64 9 3596676, Fax: +64 9 3772534 identification of wildlife species in trade.
    [Show full text]
  • Hawke's Bay Biodiversity Inventory Current State of Knowledge
    Hawke's Bay Biodiversity Inventory Current State of Knowledge August 2014 HBRC Report No. RM 13/23 – 4554 Resource Management Group ISSN 2324-4127 (PRINT) ISSN 2324-4135 (ONLINE) 159 Dalton Street . Napier 4110 Private Bag 6006 Napier 4142 Telephone (06) 835 9200 Fax (06) 835 3601 Regional Freephone (06) 0800 108 838 Environmental Science - Land Science Hawke's Bay Biodiversity Inventory Current State of Knowledge August 2014 HBRC Report No. RM 13/23 – 4554 Prepared By: Keiko Hashiba, Resource Analyst Oliver Wade, Coastal Scientist Warwick Hesketh, Land Management Advisor Reviewed By: Stephen Swabey - Manager Science Approved By: Iain Maxwell - Group Manager – Resource Management Group Signed: ISSN 2324-4127 (PRINT) ISSN 2324-4135 (ONLINE) © Copyright: Hawke's Bay Regional Council Version 3 Contents Executive summary ....................................................................................................................... 7 1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 8 2 Purpose and Structure of the Report .................................................................................... 8 2.1 Purpose of the Biodiversity Inventory ................................................................................ 8 2.2 Structure of the report ........................................................................................................ 9 3 Vulnerable species and their habitats ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tukituki Catchment Terrestrial Ecology Characterisation
    Tukituki Catchment Terrestrial Ecology Characterisation Prepared for Hawke's Bay Regional Council December 2011 EMT 11/13 HBRC Plan Number 4294 Hawke's Bay Regional Council Tukituki Catchment Terrestrial Ecology Characterisation CONTENTS 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study area .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2.1 Location and key features .............................................................................................. 1 1.2.2 ‘Catchment Units’ for description..................................................................................... 2 1.3 Report structure ................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Methods .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.4.1 Landform, geology and soil............................................................................................. 3 1.4.2 Climate ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.4.3 Land cover and flora .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Audit of Potentially Significant Natural Areas for Wellington City: Stage 1 Desktop Analysis
    AUDIT OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS FOR WELLINGTON CITY: STAGE 1 DESKTOP ANALYSIS R3942 AUDIT OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREAS FOR WELLINGTON CITY: STAGE 1 DESKTOP ANALYSIS Areas of potentially significant indigenous biodiversity occur throughout Wellington City. Contract Report No. 3942 December 2016 Project Team: Astrid van Meeuwen-Dijkgraaf - Site assessments and report author Steve Rate - Site assessments and report review Prepared for: Wellington City Council PO Box 2199 Wellington 6140 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. PROJECT SCOPE 1 2.1 Stage 1 Desktop analysis 1 2.2 Study area 2 3. METHODS 4 4. ECOLOGICAL CONTEXT 5 4.1 Wellington and Cook Strait Ecological Districts 5 4.1.1 Wellington Ecological District 6 4.1.2 Cook Strait Ecological District 7 4.2 Ecological domains 10 4.3 Singers and Rogers ecosystem classification 10 4.4 Threatened Environment Classification 11 4.5 Protected Natural Areas 13 5. RESULTS 13 5.1 Overview of potential SNAs in Wellington City 13 5.2 Potential SNAs requiring additional information and/or site visits 16 5.3 Management criteria 20 6. RECOMMENDATIONS 20 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 20 REFERENCES 21 appendices 1. Policy 23 of the Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington region (GWRC 2013) 24 2 Explanatory notes for SNA database fields 26 3 ‘Threatened’, ‘At Risk’, and regionally uncommon species in Wellington region 28 4 Management Criteria (revised from Wildland Consultuants and Kessels Ecology 2015) 32 5 Sites without any indigenous vegetation or habitat remaining that have been deleted from the database 33 6 Ecosystem types that are no longer commonplace or are poorly represented in existing protected areas 35 7 Potential SNAs in Wellington City grouped by significance and survey requirements 37 8 Summary descriptions and assessment of Potential SNAs in Wellington City 48 © 2016 Contract Report No.
    [Show full text]
  • Lizard Action Plan for Poneke Area, Wellington Conservancy
    Lizard action plan for Poneke Area, Wellington Conservancy 2009–2014 Lizard action plan for Poneke Area, Wellington Conservancy 2009–2014 Published by Department of Conservation P.O. Box 5086 Wellington, New Zealand This plan was prepared by Lynn Adams TSO Fauna, Wellington Conservancy. © Copyright 2009, New Zealand Department of Conservation ISBN: 978-0-478-14600-4 (printed copy) ISBN: 978-0-478-14601-1 (web pdf) Cover photo: Wellington green gecko (Naultinus elegans punctatus). Photo: Bryan Welch. In the interest of conservation, DOC supports paperless electronic publishing. When printing, paper manufactured with environmentally sustainable materials and processes is used wherever possible. CONTENTS Abstract 1 1. Introduction 1 2. Goals and objectives 3 3. Conservation management actions 4 3.2 Turakirae Head 4 3.3 Baring Head 4 3.4 Wellington Harbour islands 5 3.5 Makara coast 7 3.6 Other sites 7 3 .7 Translocation / disease monitoring 8 3.8 Biosecurity 9 3.9 RMA protection 10 3.10 Legal requirements 11 4. Species 12 4.1 Wellington green gecko 12 4.2 Pacific gecko 13 4.3 Spotted skink 15 4.4 Ornate skink 17 4.5 Forest gecko ‘southern North Island’ 18 4.6 Common gecko “Marlborough mini” 19 4.7 Brown skink 21 4.8 Copper skink 22 4.9 Common gecko 23 4.10 Common skink 24 5. Conclusions 25 6. References 25 iii Abstract The Poneke Area lizard action plan has been developed to guide the survey, monitoring and management of lizard fauna within the Area. It provides background material, information on the species and a list of actions for the next five years, prioritised as high, medium or low.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2019 / 2020 06 08 10 12
    WELLINGTON ZOO ANNUAL REPORT 2019 / 2020 06 08 10 12 Trust Chair Report Chief Executive Report COVID-19 Our New Strategy & Me Tiaki, Kia Ora 14 26 42 68 94 Whānau Tinana Hinengaro Wairua Oranga Our Role Our Animals Our Purpose Our Community A Healthy Organisation Integrating the United 15 World leading animal 27 Recognition and 43 Engaging, message 68 Model values 95 Nations Sustainable care so the animals live involvement of the driven experiences aligned behaviours Development Goals: their best lives Zoo’s conservation to build community Life On Land, Life expertise environmental action Sustain a safety 96 Below Water, Climate Science based animal 36 conscious culture Action, Quality welfare practices so Effective field 56 Integrating Te Ao 88 Education, Responsible the animals are happy partnerships for long Māori within the Zoo Embed wellbeing 99 Consumption and term conservation for our people Production, and Strategic species 38 outcomes Maintaining lasting 89 Sustainable Cities and planning for our site partnerships for Grow our people 105 Communities and staff expertise Focused investment 64 community support through learning Contents in conservation and conservation and development Developing 18 innovations outcomes initiatives for social, Sustain financial 116 environmental and success by data economic sustainability driven decision making Commit to 118 outstanding daily visitor care 130 134 Improve and 121 maintain the physical assets Independent Financial Statements Auditor’s Report Meet all legal 125 and compliance requirements
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Tree Variation Kāpiti Coast District Plan - Ecological Assessment
    URBAN TREE VARIATION KĀPITI COAST DISTRICT PLAN - ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT R3525m DRAFT URBAN TREE VARIATION KĀPITI COAST DISTRICT PLAN - ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Contract Report No. 3525m July 2015 Project Team: Astrid van Meeuwen-Dijkgraaf - Report author, field work Steve Rate - Report author, peer review Bruce MacKay - Field work Kelvin Lloyd -Peer review Prepared for: Kāpiti Coast District Council Private Bag 60601 Paraparaumu 5254 WELLINGTON OFFICE: 22 RAIHA STREET, ELSDON, P.O. BOX 50-539, PORIRUA Ph 04-237-7341; Fax 04-237-7496 HEAD OFFICE: 99 SALA STREET, P.O. BOX 7137, TE NGAE, ROTORUA Ph 07-343-9017; Fax 07-343-9018, email [email protected], www.wildlands.co.nz EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prior to human occupation, lowland Kāpiti Coast District comprised areas of dunes, dune, riparian and lowland forest, and wetlands. Less than 6% of these indigenous vegetation types remains within the relevant ecological districts and only about 22% of the Tararua foothill forest still exists within the Wellington Region. Much of the lowland areas are categorised as Acutely Threatened and Chronically Threatened Land Environments. The urban areas of Kāpiti Coast District all occur in these lowland areas where indigenous vegetation is significantly reduced from its original extent. Thus indigenous vegetation within the urban areas is threatened at national, regional and district levels. Trees in an urban landscape are important for a variety of reasons; ecological as well as aesthetic, economic, and cultural. The most ecologically valuable trees are found within ecological sites, which are remnants of original forests. These areas reflect the underlying historical vegetation pattern, are reservoirs of genetic variability within a species and provide habitat for flora and fauna.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Plans (Concept Adapted from Rate Et Al
    2009 OPPORTUNITIES FOR ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION OF LONGBUSH RESERVE AND THE WAIKERERU HILLS Prepared by: Ecoworks NZ Ltd. 369 Wharerata Road RD1 Gisborne Ph: 06 867-2888 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ecoworks.co.nz SUMMARY OF MANAGEMENT PRIORITIES The following priorities have been ranked with reference to the long-term objectives of the Longbush/Waikereru restoration project. When resources are tight, higher priority management actions should take precedence over lower priority management activities. However, when funding does become available it is important to incorporate lower priority activities into current management plans (concept adapted from Rate et al. 2008). Very high priority: Pest control in Longbush Reserve - Continue to control vertebrate predators to near nil densities. - Continue to exclude vertebrate grazers from entering the reserve. Very high priority: Weed control within Longbush Reserve - Continue systematic surveillance and control of weeds within Longbush Reserve. High priority: Project funding - Prepare an initial budget for the proposed restoration activities. - Begin applying to appropriate funding organisations. High priority: Additional pest control - Extend current pest control to include the 113 ha Waikereru Reserve. Pest control should target rats, mustelids, feral cats, possums and feral goats. High priority: Cessation of livestock grazing - Remove domestic livestock from the Waikereru Reserve. Ensure the fence is maintained to prevent livestock from re-entering the reserve. - Cull feral goats from within the reserve. High priority: Additional weed control - Extend current regime of surveillance and control to include the Waikereru Reserve. - Systematically monitor the Waikereru Reserve for weed invasion following the removing of livestock. Medium priority: Kiwi/weka proof fence - Construct a kiwi/weka proof fence around the perimeter of the Waikereru hills.
    [Show full text]
  • Mana Island Ecological Restoration Plan
    14. Archaeological and waahi tapu sites 14.1 THE ISLAND'S HUMAN HISTORY Mana Island has a long and fascinating history of human occupation (Day 1987; Horwood 1991). The island's name is a contraction of Te Mana o Kupe ki Aotearoa, which refers to the ability of the explorer Kupe to cross the ocean to Aotearoa. The island was inhabited around 1400A.D. (Chester & Raine 1990; Horwood 1991), but little is known of the Maori history prior to its occupation by Ngati Toa in the 1820s. During the 1840s Te Rangihaeata (a nephew of Te Rauparaha) lived in an elaboratedly carved wharepuni near the site of the current boatshed (Day 1987; Horwood 1991). Archaeological excavation of the beach ridge revealed evidence of two periods of occupation: the fifteenth century and the early nineteenth century through to the present (Horwood 1991). In 1832 the island was sold by Te Rauparaha, Te Rangihaeata and Nohoroa (Te Rauparaha's brother) to Alexander Davidson, George Bell and Archibald Mossman for goods to a collective value of £24. Soon after this Davidson sold his share to Bell, and Mossman sold his share to Frederick Peterson (Day 1987). Bell was the first European settler on the island, where he resided from 1832 until his death there in 1838. The first wool clip from the island was exported to Sydney in June 1835, and is believed to be among the earliest wool exported from New Zealand. Bell also established a small whaling station which was taken over in 1837 by Alec and Thomas Fraser, who leased the station from Peterson.
    [Show full text]