Before the Hearings Commissioners At Christchurch

UNDER the Resource Management Act 1991

AND

IN THE MATTER OF Applications by MainPower New Zealand Limited, Rooney Group Limited, Rooney Farms Limited and Kakapo Joint Venture Limited to Canterbury Regional Council for resources consents for the Kakapo Brook Hydro-Irrigation Project at Glynn Wye Station, North Canterbury

STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF MARK DAVID SANDERS

Dated: 5 October 2015

2

STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF MARK DAVID SANDERS

Introduction

1. My name is Mark David Sanders.

2. I am an Associate Director and Ecologist with Ryder Consulting Limited, an Environmental Consultancy with offices in Dunedin, Tauranga and Christchurch. I have 17 years’ experience as an applied ecologist. I have worked for Ryder Consulting since mid-2014, and previously have worked as an ecologist for myself, Boffa Miskell Ltd (Christchurch), Macquarie University (Sydney), and the Department of Conservation (Twizel).

3. I have a Bachelor of Science with Honours in Zoology (1992) and a Doctor of Philosophy in Zoology (1997), both from the University of Canterbury. I am a Certified Environmental Practitioner.

4. I am a member of the Ornithological Society of New Zealand, the New Zealand Ecological Society, the New Zealand Plant Conservation Network and the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand.

5. My involvement with this project commenced in September 2015, when I was asked to provide advice, in relation to birds of braided rivers and wetlands, by MainPower New Zealand Ltd (MainPower), Rooney Holdings Ltd and Rooney Farms Ltd (Rooney).

6. I have worked on river and wetland birds since 1992. As well as research and management on these species and their habitats, I have carried out assessments of the potential impacts of proposed hydroelectric power and/or irrigation schemes on birds of rivers, lakes and wetlands throughout New Zealand. These include projects on the Waiau River in Southland, and the Rakaia, Shotover, Nevis, Waitaki, and Wairau Rivers. Of local relevance, I have carried out similar work on the Hurunui, Waitohi, and Waiau Rivers. I have presented evidence in relation to these matters at Council, Environment Court, and Water Conservation Order Tribunal hearings. I presented evidence regarding river birds to the Hurunui and Waiau River Regional Plan hearing, on behalf of Meridian Energy Limited, in 2012.

7. I have published two book chapters and 13 scientific papers in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, including work on the impact of avian and mammalian predators on braided river birds; aspects of aquatic invertebrate ecology and avian foraging ecology, and conservation management of rivers. I am a co-author of a draft National Braided River Recovery Strategy, and was a member of the New Zealand Braided River Technical Advisory Group for several years.

8. In preparing my evidence I have complied with the Environment Court's Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the 2014 Practice Note. The issues that I address are within my area of expertise, except where I state that I am relying on the information provided by another party. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express here. 3

Scope of Evidence

9. I have been asked by MainPower and Rooney to:

a. Assess the actual and potential effects on birds of the proposed take and use of water for the Kakapo Brook hydro-generation and irrigation scheme (‘the Project’), with particular focus on braided river birds;

b. Assess whether, with respect to birds, the site is ‘significant’ as defined in the Canterbury Regional Policy Statement (CRPS).

c. Comment on the parts of the submissions and the s42A report that relate to birds;

d. Comment on the need or otherwise for mitigation or monitoring in relation to birds.

10. Because I have commenced work on this project only recently, I have not produced any reports or documentation other than this evidence.

11. In preparing my evidence, I have reviewed the following documents:

a. The application;

b. Submissions on the application;

c. The Section 42A Officer’s Report;

d. The Section 92 request for further information;

e. Responses to the Section 92 request that relate to birds and their habitats and food supplies, particularly the reports prepared by NZ Environmental, PDP, and NIWA.

12. I have also read the evidence of Mr. Rooney, Dr. Jellyman, Mr. Bonnett, Mr. Veendrick, Mr. Callander, Mr. Draper, and Mr. Lees.

13. I based my assessment of the Project on:

a. My experience in rivers and associated wetland habitats throughout New Zealand, including in North Canterbury;

b. The relevant scientific literature and unpublished reports;

c. Technical assessments prepared for this project, particularly those relating to terrestrial and freshwater ecology, which I will refer to as necessary throughout my evidence;

d. A site inspection and river bird survey which I completed on 29 September 2015. 4

14. I am satisfied that this information is sufficient for me to make a reasonable assessment of the potential effects of the Project on birds. I discuss the adequacy of this information in more detail later in my evidence.

15. I commence my evidence with an overview of the ecology of New Zealand braided river and wetland birds, in general. I then describe the river and wetland birds of Kakapo Brook and associated habitats, and the ways in which they might potentially be affected by the Project. I then go on to provide my assessment and comments on the matters above.

Overview of river and wetland bird ecology

16. Around 30 bird species are commonly found on braided rivers in New Zealand, including a number of species classified under the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Appendix A) as threatened or at risk. Braided rivers are the main breeding habitats for some of these species and are therefore important for their long-term survival.

17. The extent to which birds depend on braided river habitats varies greatly. The most specialised species, the wrybill plover (not present on Kakapo Brook) nests only on braided rivers, but overwinters on northern harbours. Other species, such as black-fronted terns, banded dotterels, and black-billed gulls, also nest and feed on other habitats such as riverside terraces, outwash moraines, developed pasture, or wetlands. For more generalist species, such as waterfowl and cormorants (‘shags’), braided rivers are just one of a wider range of habitats commonly used.

18. The diet of these birds varies greatly; different species feed, to varying extents, on aquatic (fish, aquatic invertebrates and plants) and terrestrial foods (terrestrial invertebrates, lizards, and plants).1 Foraging habitat requirements also vary. For example, wading birds such as stilts and pied oystercatchers forage, at various depths according to species, along the edges of flowing channels, pools or wetlands, and also in wet substrates, including wet pasture, whereas banded dotterels take invertebrates and plants mainly from terrestrial habitats and wet substrates. In contrast, black-fronted terns feed mainly ‘on the wing’ on drifting or emerging insects, and on small fish at or near the surface of streams and wetlands, or, in terrestrial habitats, on terrestrial invertebrates and sometimes lizards.

19. Bird use of these various habitats also varies seasonally. The general pattern is for various species of gulls, terns and wading birds (e.g., stilts, oystercatchers) to begin arriving on rivers in late winter, nest on or near river beds during spring and early summer, then migrate back to their winter coastal habitats in late summer and early autumn.

20. Almost all of these species nest on the ground, and most prefer open, flat expanses of bare or sparsely-vegetated substrates, which means that weed

1 Heather, B.; Robertson, H. 2005: Field guide to the birds of New Zealand. Penguin, Auckland, New Zealand. 5

invasion is a major cause of habitat degradation in some rivers. Nesting occurs mainly between September and December, with a few birds nesting as early as August or as late as January or February, again, varying among species.

21. Eggs and chicks are highly vulnerable to predation by mammalian and avian predators. Predation rates of 75% - 100% at any given site are common.2,3,4,5 Cats, ferrets, hedgehogs and stoats are the main mammalian predators, and harriers and southern black-backed gulls are the main avian predators, although the relative impacts of these predators varies among rivers.6, 7, 8 Incubating adults are also vulnerable to mammalian predators, and this is a major problem for the long term viability of some species.6,7,9

22. Floods, which are common in the breeding season, can also have a major impact on breeding success by destroying nests and drowning chicks, although adult birds are not directly affected by floods. At some locations, disturbance by humans and dogs can adversely affect nesting success.

Birds and habitats of Kakapo Brook and environs

23. I have compiled in Table 1 a list of all birds seen on or in the immediate vicinity of Kakapo Brook, along with their conservation status under the New Zealand threat classification system. I compiled these records from the assessments of this project, carried out by NZ Environmental and Dr. Marieke Lettink, from the Land Information New Zealand 2002 Conservation Resources Report, and from my survey of Kakapo Brook on 24 September. Table 1 also shows the numbers of birds that I counted on- and off-river during my survey.

24. The river and environs support low numbers of an assemblage of birds typical of that found on other similar, small high country rivers. I recorded nine indigenous and four introduced species on the Kakapo Brook riverbed, or flying over it or nearby paddocks. These included the following four threatened or at risk species.

a. Black-fronted terns (threatened - nationally endangered) – four over the Kakapo Brook riverbed and six over paddocks within 1 km of the river.

b. Banded dotterel (threatened - nationally vulnerable) – 17 on the riverbed;

2 Boffa Miskell. 2007. Black-fronted tern trial: effects of flow and predator control on breeding success. Unpublished report prepared for Meridian Energy by Boffa Miskell Limited in conjunction with Urtica Consulting, April 2007. 3 McClellan R.K. 2009. The ecology and management of Southland’s black-billed gulls. PhD thesis, University of Otago. 4 Keedwell, R.J. 2005: Breeding biology of Black-fronted Terns (Sterna albostriata) and the effects of predation. Emu 105: 39-47. 5 Keedwell, R.J.; Sanders, M.D.; Alley, M.; Twentyman, C. 2002: Causes of mortality of black-fronted terns Sterna albostriata on the Ohau River, South Island, New Zealand. Pacific Conservation Biology 8: 170-176. 6 Steffens K.E., Sanders M.D., Gleeson D.M., Pullen K.M., & Stowe C.J. 2012. Identification of predators at black-fronted tern Chlidonias albostriatus nests using mtDNA analysis and digital video recorders. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 2012 (36)1: 48-55. 7 Sanders, M. D. & Maloney R.F. (2002). Causes of mortality at nests of ground-nesting birds in the Upper Waitaki Basin, New Zealand: a five-year video study. Biological Conservation, 106(2), 225-236. 8 McClellan R.K. 2009. The ecology and management of Southland’s black-billed gulls. PhD thesis, University of Otago. 9 Dowding, J.E.; Murphy, E.C. 2001: The impact of predation by introduced mammals on endemic shorebirds in New Zealand: a conservation perspective. Biological Conservation 99: 47-64.

6

c. Pied oystercatchers (at risk - declining) – 11 on the riverbed and 7 on nearby paddocks, and

d. New Zealand pipit (at risk - declining) – four on the riverbed and adjacent terraces, and heard and seen on surrounding terrestrial habitats.

These species were also recorded in previous surveys.

25. Table 2 shows the estimated national populations of these species, as listed on the NZ Birds Online Digital Encyclopaedia of New Zealand Birds, and the numbers recorded in the most recent surveys of the nearby Waiau and Hurunui Rivers. Although present in only low numbers, all individuals of the species present on Kakapo Brook potentially contribute to the long-term viability of these threatened or at risk species.

26. The banded dotterels and pied oystercatchers were displaying nesting behaviour on the Kakapo Brook river bed, and were almost certainly nesting on the river. The black-fronted terns were seen mainly over pasture but also over Kakapo Brook, feeding and displaying courtship behaviour. Black-fronted terns nest later than the other species. From their behavior I consider that it is possible that they would nest on the gravel riverbed of Kakapo Brook, or on nearby terraces or farmland with low, open vegetation. NZ pipit will be nesting in rough pasture throughout the area, and probably on the riverbed in places.

27. Compared to larger braider rivers, Kakapo Brook is relatively steep, with coarse substrates. Much of the terrestrial habitat has is too heavily vegetated and/or has too coarse a substrate to provide suitable habitat for river birds. However, several larger, open flats within the river bed do provide suitable bird habitat and it was at these sites that I observed banded dotterels and pied oystercatchers displaying nesting behaviour.

28. Kakapo Brook and the surrounding area provides a diversity of aquatic habitats for birds. These are described in detail in the application and associated maps, but, in summary, comprise the main stem of Kakapo Brook; various tributaries; wet ‘seeps’ and wetlands on terraces beside the river (notably the Upper and Main Kakapo Brook Swamps and the Lower Dismal Valley Swamp); off-river ponds and wetlands such as the Upper Dismal Valley Swamp; Lake Lorraine and Horseshoe Lake, and wet pasture in places. Some species of birds (e.g. black-fronted terns) may fly further afield to forage at other habitats such as the Hope River.

29. These habitats, together with the surrounding terrestrial habitats, comprise a network of foraging, roosting, and nesting habitats that will be used to varying extents by different bird species, under different conditions. For example, when rivers are in flood or when pasture is saturated, bringing invertebrates to the surface, birds will often forage off-river. I have previously seen black-fronted terns actively foraging on pasture beside the Hope River during high river flow, and it is likely that birds from the Hope River also forage over parts of Glynn Wye Station, including areas that are proposed to be irrigated. 7

Significance assessment

30. With regard to birds, Kakapo Brook and the adjacent habitat is significant as defined in the CRPS, because it meets at least one of the significance criteria in Appendix 3 of the CRPS:

a. It supports four indigenous bird species that are threatened, at risk, or uncommon, nationally or within the relevant ecological district (Criterion 4);

b. It contains an association of indigenous species, namely the various river and wetland birds just mentioned, that occurs within an originally rare ecosystem, that is, a braided river (Criterion 6).

It may also meet other criteria, for other ecological components not directly related to birds, that I have not considered here.

Overview of ways in which flow can affect birds

31. The proposed Project would entail abstracting up to 1600 L/s of water from Kakapo Brook, resulting in reduced and more stable flows. It would also involve the construction of a canal, two storage ponds, and associated infrastructure. Changes in flow are described in detail in the evidence of Mr. Veendrick and Dr. Jellyman, and I refer to the relevant aspects of those changes in my assessment below. Broadly, the changes in flow of relevance to birds would be:

a. A reduction in flow: e.g. the median flow would reduce from 876 L/s to 320 L/s, and,

b. A reduction in flow variability, particularly in the 750 metres immediately downstream of the proposed intake.

32. In general terms, changes in flow can affect birds of braided rivers in New Zealand, positively or adversely, in four main ways:

a. By reducing or increasing flood risk to eggs and chicks during the breeding season;

b. By affecting the frequency or magnitude of flows that disturb or remove vegetation, especially weeds, and consequently affecting habitat suitability for birds;

c. By altering number and/or size of braids and therefore changing the probability of mammalian predators reaching islands and preying on eggs, chicks or incubating adults; and,

d. By affecting species composition and abundance of aquatic invertebrates and fish, which form part of the diet of many river birds.

Assessment of Effects

33. I now consider each of the above factors. 8

Flood risk

34. Flood risk to birds will be unaffected for two reasons: First, all floods greater than three times the median flow will continue to pass unimpeded down the river, as described in the evidence of Mr. Veendrick and Dr. Jellyman. Second, the nesting habitat on Kakapo Brook is relatively elevated compared to some larger braided rivers, where reduced flows could result in birds nesting closer to channels on very low gradient substrates, where they are subsequently more prone to floods. This is very unlikely to be a risk on Kakapo Brook because of the steepness of the stream channel edges, the availability of relatively elevated nesting habitats and the low number of birds present.

Weed invasion

35. In their s92 response, PDP state that ‘The number and surface area of overland flow paths to the brook, and the fact that the brook is generally confined to the mainstem, mean that it is highly unlikely that the reduced flows will result in the promotion of woody growth. Weed control on the property is well managed with only isolated gorse, woolly mullein, Californian and scotch thistle observed on or near the riverbed.’ This conclusion is consistent with my observations of other smaller rivers, and my observations of the low density of weeds and apparently diligent weed control on Glynn Wye Station. Large floods, which might clear vegetation including weeds from the Kakapo River bed, will be unaffected. For these reasons, it is my view that the Project is unlikely to affect the distribution or density of weeds on or near Kakapo Brook.

36. Instead, in my opinion, the main determinant of weed distribution and density at this site, has been, and will be continue to be, weed management by the landholder.

Predation

37. Predation on river birds is very unlikely to be affected by the proposed changes in flow, at this site. This is because Kakapo Brook is almost entirely a single channel river, and has few islands to provide nesting habitat with a slightly reduced risk of mammalian predation. From aerial photographs, Kakapo Brook has 55 ha of open, relatively un-vegetated riverbed downstream of the proposed intake, including 2.9 ha of island habitat, with the remainder of the riverbed being directly connected to the surrounding habitat and therefore easily accessible to mammalian predators. Most of the birds that I observed nesting were not on islands, and most of the physically suitable nesting habitat was not on islands. Thus, almost all of the birds that nest on the river, and almost all nesting habitat, is already accessible to mammalian predators.

38. Accessibility of nests to avian predators - harriers and southern black-backed gulls - would not be affected by changes in flow. Both of these predator species are present in the immediate vicinity of Kakapo Brook, and will almost certainly be preying on river bird eggs and chicks, although nothing is known of the relative impact of various predators in this system. 9

Food supplies and foraging habitat

39. It is critical that birds have access to sufficient food, particularly during the breeding season when nutrition demands are high because of the need to produce and incubate eggs, and, for some species (e.g. terns), to feed chicks.

40. As mentioned above, the birds found on Kakapo Brook feed on a wide diversity of both terrestrial and aquatic prey (and plant material in the case of banded dotterels). Indeed, banded dotterels and pied oystercatchers often nest on predominantly terrestrial habitats, such as outwash moraines in the Mackenzie Basin, or on farmland, some distance from rivers. Black-fronted terns are more dependent on aquatic food sources, always nest near aquatic habitats, and forage mainly on aquatic or relatively wet habitats. I discuss potential effects of the Project on various habitat types, and on birds of the Hope River, below.

Riparian terrestrial habitats

41. The proposed reduction in flow will not affect the terrestrial habitats and food supplies found on the Kakapo Brook riverbed and adjacent terraces because these consist of extensive areas of dry habitats that are some distance from, and not directly affected, by the mainstem flow.

Riparian wetland habitats

42. As well as terrestrial habitats, the immediate margins of Kakapo Brook provide aquatic or semi-aquatic foraging habitat in the form of tributaries and seeps and wetlands. PDP, in their S92 response, note that ‘In the course of approximately 4km of riverbank 15 freshwater input defined locations were observed and several seeps in eroded banks’. This is consistent with my field observations.

43. With regard to riparian wetlands, PDP in their s92 response, conclude that ‘the continuous monitoring data over a five month period (July 2014 to December 2014) in the representative Main Kakapo Brook Swamp has shown no observable response in wetland levels to river flows. Based on this, no adverse effects are anticipated in the stream margin wetlands as a result of the water take and water use’. On the basis on this conclusion, I conclude that the value of the riparian wetlands as foraging habitat for river birds will be unaffected by the project. The wetlands could provide habitat for wetland birds. If so, these birds would also be unaffected, for the same reason.

Off-river wetlands

44. Off-river wetlands, especially the 12-ha Upper Dismal Valley Swamp, also provide foraging habitat for birds. The proposed Environmental Management Plan (EMP) includes measures to avoid and mitigate adverse effects on surface water features including wetlands and swamps. So long as suitable measures are implemented, the value of these wetlands as bird habitat would not be adversely affected. Indeed, there are good opportunities to improve wetland condition especially by excluding stock and carrying out weed control. 10

Storage ponds and canal

45. The proposed storage ponds and canal will result in the availability of an additional 19 ha and 1 ha of surface water, respectively. It is likely that these, especially the pond, will be used as foraging habitat for birds, but it is not possible to precisely evaluate the overall value of these as habitat for birds.

Off-river terrestrial habitats

46. Off-river terrestrial habitats, such as farm paddocks will, in my opinion, improve as foraging habitat as a result of irrigation. I base this on my observations at various sites throughout New Zealand where I have seen waterbirds, sometimes in abundance, foraging on or over irrigated pasture. These have included threatened species such as pied oystercatchers and black-fronted terns. I note that Mr. Rooney makes similar observations in his evidence, where he describes how irrigated pasture and new wetlands on his property near Wainono Lagoon in South Canterbury have provided habitat for a diversity of waterbirds.

47. At times of tall pasture growth under irrigation, pasture might be less physically accessible for some feeding birds. However, large areas of un-irrigated grassland habitats will continue to be available away from the irrigated pastures; in any given season, it is proposed that 500 ha would be irrigated within the 1000 ha command area, as discussed by Mr. Draper in his evidence.

48. Overall, increased off-river foraging opportunities on irrigated pastures may be beneficial for river birds – of both Kakapo Brook and the nearby Hope River – especially at times when food supplies may be in short supply, such as during and immediately after floods.

Instream habitats of Kakapo Brook

49. Mr. Lees and Dr. Jellyman, in their evidence, describe the aquatic habitats and invertebrate and fish communities of Kakapo Brook. Dr. Jellyman has modelled the potential effects of the Project on the availability of instream habitat for aquatic invertebrates and fish, which form part of the diet of river birds.

50. From Figure 5 in his evidence, it can be seen that Dr. Jellyman’s modelling predicts that the proposed minimum flow of 320 L/s, which would also be the median flow under the proposal, would result in the retention of 58% of maximum aquatic invertebrate habitat and 90% of maximum fish habitat. Maximal habitat is available at varying flows, depending on species, as described by Dr. Jellyman in his evidence and the application. For example, maximum habitat for the mayfly, Deleatidum spp., a prey item for black-fronted terns, occurs at 1000 L/s, whereas maximal habitat for upland bullies, also preyed on by terns, occurs at 400 L/s. Dr. Jellyman concludes that, with the proposed conditions designed to retain some flow variability and flush nuisance periphyton growth, the ecological values present in Kakapo Brook will be retained. 11

51. On the basis of Dr. Jellyman’s predicted reductions in availability of habitat for aquatic invertebrates and fish in Kakapo Brook, it is likely that the availability of these food supplies will be reduced for river birds.

52. In my opinion, the predicted reduction in instream habitat availability and associated potential reduction in instream food supplies for birds is unlikely to have significant adverse effects on river birds, for the following reasons:

a. The main stem of the river represents a very small proportion of the available habitat within the Kakapo Brook flood plain. The existing and fairly extensive areas of terrestrial and aquatic riparian habitats, described above, will continue to be available as foraging habitat.

b. The number of birds potentially affected is low.

c. Any losses would be partly or completely offset by the increased availability of off-river foraging habitat in the form of irrigated pasture, the storage pond and canal, and potentially through improved condition of wetlands as a result of management under the EMP.

Hope River

53. Water used for hydro-generation would be discharged to the Hope River 9 km upstream of where it would have joined the Hope River if left in Kakapo Brook. Discharge could vary between nil and 1.6 m³/s on a daily basis. This would result in a slight increase in flow, flow variability, and area of aquatic habitat in the Hope River over these 9 kilometres. In my opinion, the effects would be so small in relation to the Hope River flow as to have nil or negligible effects (adverse or beneficial) on birds.

Summary of Effects

54. In my opinion, flood risk to birds on Kakapo Brook will be unaffected mainly because large floods will continue to pass unimpeded down the river.

55. Weed invasion is unlikely to be exacerbated by reduced flows because large, potentially weed-clearing flows will be retained. The main determinant of weed distribution, in my opinion, will continue to be weed management by the landholder.

56. Predation by mammalian predators is very unlikely to increase as a result of reduced flow because almost all potential nesting habitat is already accessible to mammalian predators, due to a lack of islands.

57. In my opinion, potential reductions in instream food supplies are unlikely to adversely affect birds because of the retention of a much greater area of terrestrial and aquatic habitats along the river margin and on farmland, and the likely enhancement of foraging habitat on irrigated pasture and at the storage ponds. 12

58. Overall, in my opinion, the birds of Kakapo Brook and surrounding farmland, are more likely to be positively affected than adversely affected by the proposal, because of improved foraging opportunities.

Mitigation and Monitoring

59. In my opinion, no mitigation or monitoring is necessary specifically with regard to birds, because of the low likelihood of adverse effects and the small number of birds potentially affected.

60. I have assumed, in making my assessment, that the management of surface water bodies and wetlands as proposed in the EMP will be implemented. Monitoring will be necessary to ensure that it is.

61. Whilst not necessary, further surveys of number and habitat use by bird on the river and surrounding habitats would be useful to inform future decisions about management of bird habitats at Glynn Wye Station.

Submissions and s42A report

62. A common concern, raised in the submissions of Director General of Conservation (DOC), Forest and Bird, and BRaid, and in the S42A report (paras 95, 116, 219, 259), is that insufficient detail was provided regarding birds and how they might be affected by the proposed Project. In my view these are valid criticisms of the application.

63. I consider that I have addressed that deficiency, in this evidence, and by my recent bird survey of Kakapo Brook. Whilst few bird surveys have been made, the surveys are adequate, in my view, for two reasons. First, my and other ecologist’s records of bird species and abundance are consistent with the area and type of habitat available. Second, any potential impacts on the birds would occur indirectly, through changes in habitat, flood risk, food supplies and predation, as discussed above. Assessments of these potential effects rely on a mix of qualitative and quantitative data on habitat, as I have presented. More bird surveys would add confidence about the number and location of birds potentially affected through these mechanisms, but would not alter my overall conclusions.

64. In their submissions, DOC, BRaid and Forest and Bird all raise general concerns about potential adverse effects of water abstraction on birds. I have addressed the concerns (and other potential issues) in detail in my evidence.

……………………………………………………………………. Mark David Sanders

Date: 5 October 2015

Table 1. Compilation of all known records of bird species recorded on Kakapo Brook or in immediately vicinity. H=heard, S=seen but not counted. Introd. & nat. = Introduced & Naturalised.

Common name Scientific name Conservation status 24/9/15 24/9/15 On river off river Native birds Black-fronted tern Chlidonias albostriatus Nationally Endangered 4 6

Banded dotterel Charadrius bicinctus bicinctus Nationally Vulnerable 17 0 Pied oystercatcher Haematopus finschi Declining 11 7 New Zealand pipit Anthus n. novaeseelandiae Declining 1 3 White-faced Heron Egretta novaehollandiae Not threatened 1 0 Southern black-backed gull Larus dominicanus dominicanus Not threatened 2 6 bellbird Anthornis m. melanura Not threatened H brown creeper Mohoua novaeseelandiae Not threatened grey warbler Gerygone igata Not threatened paradise shelduck Tadorna variegata Not threatened 2 6 silvereye Zosterops l. lateralis Not threatened South Island fantail Rhipidura f. fuliginosa Not threatened spur-winged plover Vanellus miles novaehollandiae Not threatened 3 9 swamp harrier Circus approximans Not threatened welcome swallow Hirundo tahitica neoxena Not threatened yellow-breasted tomtit Petroica m. macrocephala Not threatened Introduced birds Australian magpie Gymnorhina tibicen Introd. & Nat. blackbird Turdus merula Introd. & Nat. Canada goose Branta canadensis Introd. & Nat. 10 chaffinch Fringilla coelebs Introd. & Nat. H H goldfinch Carduelis carduelis Introd. & Nat. greenfinch Carduelis chloris Introd. & Nat. H H Eurasian skylark Alauda arvensis Introd. & Nat. H, S H, S mallard Anas platyrhynchos Introd. & Nat. redpoll Carduelis flammea Introd. & Nat. starling Sturnus vulgaris Introd. & Nat. yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella Introd. & Nat. California quail

Table 2. Estimated national populations of threatened and at risk species found on Kakapo Brook, and recent counts from Kakapo Brook, and the nearby Hurunui and Waiau Rivers. n.d. = no data. (Waiau and Hurunui data sources: Schmechel F. 2008. Braided River Bird Surveys of the Waiau River and Eight Smaller Canterbury Rivers, Spring 2008. Environment Canterbury Report; DOC unpublished data;

Kakapo Brook Waiau River Hurunui River Species Estimated national population 24/9/15 2010 2010 Black-fronted terns 5,000-10,000 4 629 280

Banded dotterel 50,000 (some sources say <30,000) 17 610 240 Pied oystercatchers <110,000 11 149 139

New Zealand pipit Not estimated. Widespread but declining. 1 n.d. n.d.

14

APPENDIX A. NEW ZEALAND THREAT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM10

Qualifiers are an integral part of the New Zealand Threat Classification System and must be cited in publications referring to the threat status of taxa listed under this system. Qualifiers provide critical additional information about a taxon’s listing, status and management. When a taxon is listed, all of the qualifiers that apply to it are recorded in alphabetical order as subscripts after the threat category. For example:

Anzybas carsei ‘Nationally Critical CD, EF, OL, RF’

The qualifiers (abbreviations in brackets) and their full definitions are listed below:

Conservation Dependent (CD)

The taxon is likely to move to a higher threat category if current management ceases.

Data Poor (DP)

Confidence in the listing is low due to there being only poor data available for assessment.

Designated (De)

A taxon that does not fit within the criteria provided, and which the Expert Panel has designated to the most appropriate listing without full application of the criteria. For example, a commercial fish stock that is being fished down to Biomass Maximum Sustainable Yield (BMSY) may meet criteria for ‘Declining’; however, it could be designated as ‘Not Threatened’ if the Expert Panel believes that this better describes the taxon’s risk of extinction.

Extinct in the Wild (EW)

The taxon is known only in cultivation or captivity.

Extreme Fluctuations (EF)

10 Townsend, A.J.; de lange, P.J.; Duffy, C.A.J.; Miskelly, C.M.; Molloy, J.; Norton, D.A. 2008. New Zealand Threat Classification System Manual. Science and Technical Publishing, Department of Conservatrion, Wellington, New Zealand.

15

The taxon experiences extreme unnatural population fluctuations, or natural fluctuations overlaying human-induced declines, that increase the threat of extinction. When ranking taxa with extreme fluctuations, the lowest number of mature individuals should be used for determining population size, as a precautionary measure.

Increasing (Inc)

There is an ongoing or predicted increase of > 10% in the total population, taken over the next 10 years or three generations, whichever is longer. Note that this qualifier is redundant for taxa ranked as ‘Recovering’.

Island Endemic (IE)

A taxon whose natural distribution is restricted to one island archipelago (e.g. Auckland Islands) and is not part of the North or South Islands or Stewart Island/Rakiura.

One Location (OL)

Found at one location (geographically or ecologically distinct area) of less than 1000 km2 (100 000 ha), in which a single event (e.g. a predator irruption) could easily affect all individuals of the taxon, e.g. L’Esperance Rock groundsel (Senecio lautus var. esperensis) and Open Bay Island leech (Hirudobdella antipodum). Taxa with restricted distributions but where it is unlikely that all sub-populations would be threatened by a single event (e.g. because water gaps within an archipelago are larger than known rodent swimming distances) should be qualified as ‘Range Restricted’ (RR). ‘OL’ can apply to all ‘Threatened’ and ‘At Risk’ taxa, regardless of whether their restricted distribution is natural or human-induced.

Partial Decline (PD)

Taxa undergoing decline over the majority of their range, but with one or more secure populations (such as on offshore islands). Partial decline taxa (e.g. North Island kaka Nestor meridionalis septentrionalis and Pacific gecko Hoplodactylus pacificus) are declining towards ‘Relict’ status rather than towards extinction.

Range Restricted (RR)

Taxa confined to specific substrates, habitats or geographic areas of less than 1000 km2 (100 000 ha); this is assessed by taking into account the area of occupied habitat of all sub-populations (and summing the areas of habitat if there is more than one sub- population), e.g. Chatham Island forget-me-not (Myosotidium hortensia) and Auckland Island snipe (Coenocorypha aucklandica aucklandica). This qualifier can apply to all ‘Threatened’ and ‘At Risk’ taxa regardless of whether their restricted distribution is natural or human-induced, but is redundant if a taxon is confined to ‘One Location’ (OL).

Recruitment Failure (RF)

The taxon’s current population may appear stable but the age structure is such that catastrophic declines are likely in the future.

Secure Overseas (SO)

The taxon is secure in other parts of its natural range outside New Zealand.

Sparse (Sp)

Taxa that occur within typically small and widely scattered populations.

Stable (St)

The total population is stable (± 10%), taken over the last 10 years or three generations, whichever is longer.

Threatened Overseas (TO)

The taxon is threatened in those parts of its natural range outside New Zealand.